Open Letter
Formal Notice of Institutional Misconduct, Provable Lies to the Court, and Coverups within the Insolvency Service
Introduction
On 30th October 2025, the following letter was sent to Alec Pybus, Chief Executive Officer of the Insolvency Service (UK).
Copied into this correspondence were the boards and oversight authorities to whom Mr Pybus is formally accountable. These include:
Department for Business and Trade Board
-
- Rt Hon Peter Kyle MP – Secretary of State for Business and Trade
- Paul Drechsler CBE – Lead Non-Executive Director
- John Latham CBE – Non-Executive Director
- Iain Anderson – Non-Executive Director
- Katharine Braddick – Non-Executive Director
- Mike Clancy – Non-Executive Director
Insolvency Service Board
-
- Mark Austen – Chair
- Samantha Durrant – Non-Executive Member
- Gary Kildare – Non-Executive Member
- Frances Coulson – Non-Executive Member
- Eoin Parker – Non-Executive Member
Purpose of the Letter:
1. To ensure that Mr Pybus and his boards are fully aware of the systematic wrongdoing that has taken place under their stewardship;
2. To hold Mr Pybus accountable to the standards of integrity, duty, and transparency required of a public officer in his position; and
3. To ensure the public are informed of the abuse of process that has occurred, empowering them to recognise and challenge corruption, manipulation, and institutional malpractice within the Insolvency Service.
Call to Action:
If you have been wronged by the Insolvency Service, we invite you to share your story and take a stand against institutional wrongdoing and corruption. Together, we can hold these officials to account.
Please share the objective facts of your case at the bottom of this page and we would like to learn more, understand what has happened, and, with your consent, help share your story. The greater the exposure of corruption, the greater the awareness, accountability, and ultimately, justice.
Mr Pybus,
1. Purpose of this Letter
1.1 I write to you in your capacity as CEO of the Insolvency Service to place on the record a series of serious institutional failures, acts of misconduct, and deliberate cover-ups within your organisation that have directly contributed to a grave miscarriage of justice in the matter of Mr Shaun Cooper (Case No: CR-2023-000076) and, more broadly, in the Lighthouse International Group liquidation proceedings.
1.2 This is not a routine complaint. It is a formal and public notice of accountability, for the actions of specific officers, for the culture that enabled those actions, and for the leadership under which they occurred. The issues raised are not administrative oversights or isolated errors. They amount to the misuse of state power to mislead the Court, withhold critical evidence, and obstruct procedural fairness. Such conduct, if left unaddressed, undermines the rule of law and public confidence in the integrity of the Insolvency Service.
1.3 For the avoidance of doubt, this correspondence and all future communications on this matter will form part of the public record in the public interest. It will be preserved, published, and relied upon in ongoing legal, regulatory, and public accountability processes.
2. Provable Lies, Deception and Breaches of Candour Before the Court
2.1 On 29th July 2025, during a High Court hearing before Judge Agnello, Deputy Official Receiver Michael Bint made statements that were demonstrably and provably false. These deliberate misrepresentations were relied upon by the Court in reaching its decision, resulting in the unlawful maintenance of a warrant of arrest against Mr Cooper. If substantiated as the record indicates, this conduct constitutes a serious abuse of public office and a criminal act, and every lawful and legal avenue will be pursued to ensure accountability, including at the most senior levels of the Insolvency Service.
2.2 The record shows:
a. False statement on “non-cooperation” – Mr Bint told the Court that Mr Cooper’s “non-cooperation had been dealt with by Judge Schaffer.” This was untrue. On 26 November 2024, Judge Schaffer expressly refused to issue a warrant of arrest and directed an independent medical report. This was a deliberate distortion of the court record, not an error of nuance but an act designed to mislead and weaponise the judicial process.
b. False claim about attendance – Mr Bint told the Court there was “no indication” Mr Cooper would not attend the February hearing. This was knowingly false. Both the Court and the Insolvency Service had received:
– Continuous NHS Med-3 certificates confirming medical incapacity;
– Written submissions in advance of the hearing;
– Explicit notice of his overseas location on medical and safeguarding grounds, including documented death threats under police investigation.
c. Admission of withholding evidence – Mr Bint admitted in open court that the Official Receiver’s report relied upon at the hearing on 25th February 2025 was never served to Mr Cooper. This report was stated to be central to ICC Judge Prentis’s decision to issue a warrant of arrest – a decision made without Mr Cooper as the respondent ever being given the opportunity to see or respond to the information/arguments used against him.
2.3 These actions represent grave breaches of the duty of candour owed by public officers to the Court and the public. This was not mere incompetence, it was unlawful, and purposefully lying in court is criminal, and corrosive to the integrity of the Judicial System itself.
3. A Coordinated Institutional Cover-up
3.1 The Insolvency Service’s response to this misconduct has been characterised by deflection, concealment, and evasion rather than accountability:
a. Refusal to correct false statements, despite repeated and documented requests.
b. Evasive and vague statements (29th September 2025) asserting “all relevant material was before the court,” when it is provably not the case.
c. Procedural delays deliberately timed to obstruct Mr Cooper’s appeal.
d. Use of generic labels such as “Public Interest Unit” in communications to shield individuals from scrutiny.
3.2 These are not the actions of a public agency acting in good faith. They reflect an institution attempting to bury its wrongdoing behind bureaucracy in order to evade legal and public accountability.
4. Personal and Institutional Responsibility
4.1 As CEO, you carry ultimate responsibility for both the conduct of your officers and the culture in which they operate.
4.2 Under your leadership, the Insolvency Service has:
a. Provably lied to, and subsequently misled, the High Court,
b. Withheld evidence in liberty-affecting proceedings,
c. Ignored medical incapacity and safeguarding concerns,
d. Engaged in institutional obstruction and cover-ups when challenged.
4.3 This letter places you personally under direct legal and public notice of accountability. Failure to take immediate, decisive action will not be treated as administrative oversight. It will be regarded as knowing complicity in unlawful and corrupt conduct, with full legal, regulatory, and public consequences to follow.
5. Required Actions
5.1 In light of the matters set out above, the Insolvency Service is hereby formally required to take immediate corrective action to address the serious breaches of candour, procedural fairness, and institutional accountability outlined in this letter. These actions are neither optional nor discretionary; they are necessary to uphold the integrity of the legal process and the public’s trust in your agency.
5.2 We therefore demand that the Insolvency Service:
a. Acknowledge and Correct False Statements – Formally acknowledge, in writing, the false and misleading representations made by Deputy Official Receiver Michael Bint and other officers to the High Court, and the failure to serve critical evidence in advance of the 25 February 2025 hearing.
Timeline: within 7 working days of sending this letter.
b. Rectify the Court Record and Remedy the Harm – Provide a formal written clarification to the Court of Appeal (Case Ref: CH-2025-000235) correcting the court record, confirming the procedural failures, and supporting the immediate quashing of the warrant of arrest issued against Mr Cooper.
Timeline: within 10 working days of sending this letter.
c. Accountability Measures for Named Officers – Commence appropriate disciplinary and, where applicable, legal proceedings against the officers responsible, namely Joseph Sullivan, Michael Bint, Victoria Prime, and Daniel Curthoys, for their roles in making false representations, withholding evidence, and obstructing due process.
Timeline: confirmation of initiation of action within 20 working days of sending this letter.
d. Structural and Cultural Reform – Present a clear plan to restore compliance with the duty of candour and rebuild public trust.
5.3 A named senior official must be appointed as the formal point of contact for all correspondence and accountability relating to this matter. This must be communicated in writing within five working days of sending this letter.
5.4 Failure to meet these requirements in full and within the stated timelines will be treated as knowing and wilful institutional non-compliance, and the matter will be escalated without further notice to the Court of Appeal, the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office, relevant parliamentary oversight bodies, and citizen-led legal accountability mechanisms.
6. The Appeal and Accountability Process
6.1 This matter will not end with this letter. Mr Cooper is appealing the outcome of the July hearing and is seeking to have the warrant of arrest quashed and overturned, with full compensation and a public apology. Simultaneously, steps are underway to hold the individuals involved accountable through multiple lawful and public channels:
a. The Court of Public Opinion – Citizen Intervention Global is already coordinating the public exposure of this misconduct, reaching millions of British citizens and international audiences. This includes lawful public disclosure, media reporting, and private prosecutions where criminality is evident.
b. Formal international escalation – A series of open letters will be addressed to President Donald J. Trump, the first of which is being penned as we speak, to request his intervention in exposing institutional corruption and the weaponisation of state resources against citizens. The Insolvency Service and your name will be central to these letters. These letters will lay bare the misconduct, deception, and systemic abuse of power within UK public institutions that have betrayed the trust of the very people they were established to protect and serve. At the centre of this growing scandal stands the case of Mr Cooper, whose treatment by the UK Insolvency Service exemplifies how authority can be abused under the guise of public duty. The conduct of the Insolvency Service under your stewardship, Mr Pybus, will be examined as part of this public disclosure, alongside the actions and names of Official Receivers Joseph Sullivan and Victoria Prime, and Deputy Official Receivers Michael Bint and Daniel Curthoys. Their actions, and the collusion surrounding them, will be documented as evidence of how the machinery of state has been turned against its own citizens.
c. The Court of Appeal – This case is being actively challenged on the grounds of false evidence, procedural unfairness, and judicial oversight failures.
d. Regulatory and Oversight Bodies – This case will also be presented to the Chief Justice of England and Wales, the Secretary of State for Justice, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, and other relevant regulators. This is to ensure this matter is independently investigated at the highest levels of the British justice system and not buried under institutional self-protection or cover-ups.
e. The Insolvency Service – This letter itself serves as formal notice to you, Mr Pybus, to address misconduct and failures of candour within your agency. The case of Lighthouse International Group and Shaun Cooper is not a one-off. There are other cases of how the powers delegated to the Insolvency Service have been abused, and these cases have been reported publicly (some of which has been re-published on www.insolvencyservicecorruption.com). As a leader employed by the State you have an incredible opportunity to reform the Insolvency Service into a world-class institution of moral and ethical excellence. However, that is simply not possible when you choose to ignore blatant and evidential examples of heinous wrongdoing in the name of public service.
f. Private Prosecution Service UK (PPS) – Let me be clear, accountability will not be limited to the internal processes of the Insolvency Service or to appeals through traditional channels. PPS UK is an initiative under Citizen Intervention Global, established to ensure that when state institutions fail to hold their own to account, citizens lawfully will. If you or any officer under your leadership is found to have lied to the Court, concealed material evidence, or perverted the course of justice, private criminal prosecution will be initiated. No office, title, or position will shield any individual from legal accountability.
7. Closing Statement
7.1 Mr Pybus, the line between error and corruption is crossed the moment truth is deliberately withheld. Your agency has lied to the High Court, withheld evidence, and shielded its officers from accountability. Based on our experience, this case represents an extension of a broader pattern of serious incompetence and misconduct within the Insolvency Service. These actions, which have already been documented and evidenced in other cases, including The Case of Kids Company, are detailed on this website and including:
- https://insolvencyservicecorruption.com/the-case-of-kids-company/
- https://insolvencyservicecorruption.com/predatory-bbc-journalists-catrin-nye-jamie-bartlett-ed-main-exposed/
- https://insolvencyservicecorruption.com/holding-the-insolvency-service-accountable-for-continued-harassment/
7.2 You now face a clear and unavoidable choice:
a. Act decisively to expose and remedy this misconduct, or
b. Be remembered as the leader who presided over an institution that deliberately weaponised the state against an innocent man and organisation.
7.3 I expect acknowledgement of this letter within five working days and a substantive response within twenty working days.
We trust you will take this opportunity to act responsibly, decisively, and in the public interest.
James Mills on behalf of Mr Cooper
Lighthouse Global
www.insolvencyservicecorruption.com
Legal Notice and Disclaimer:
This article forms part of a broader public interest investigation into the conduct of UK public authorities and judicial officers. The matters referenced herein are currently the subject of an ongoing appeal filed by Mr Cooper in relation to High Court proceeding and related applications before the Court of Appeal.
This publication does not seek to influence or interfere with any ongoing judicial proceedings, nor does it assert final conclusions on any unresolved legal or factual matters. It is published solely in the public interest to ensure transparency, accountability, and awareness of systemic issues within public administration.
All information is presented in good faith, based on documentary evidence, official records, and the right to fair comment under UK and international law. Readers are encouraged to consider the material in the context of ongoing legal processes and to refrain from drawing premature conclusions until judicial matters are concluded.
What is very evident is that this has become bitter and personal for the likes of Michael Bint and others at the Insolvency Service. They are supposed to be civil servants, but they are not civil and do not serve the public based on what we (and many others) have experienced.
It says a lot about the character and culture of those who work at the Insolvency Service. We’re not making up false accusations, we’re just presenting facts, evidence and reasoning that raise the question as to whether the Insolvency Service is embarrassingly incompetent, maliciously evil or both?
Over the course of the last 3-4 years, I’ve seen how the Insolvency Service loves to abuse the powers it’s been bestowed by the Secretary of State, along with weaponising legal tricknicalities in court. I am shocked at how naive I’ve been my whole life when it comes to believing that government institutions have pure intentions, standing for truth, justice and honour, and are accountable to the public they are appointed to serve.
Yet like any schoolyard bully I’ve seen how those at the Insolvency Service absolutely loathe and detest being held accountable to the truth.
The everyday citizen hates a hypocrite and especially those presenting themselves as an angel of light. We’ve read and heard stories of how the Insolvency Service has wrecked the lives of honest, hardworking people. Yet there’s no accountability.
This is why CItizen Intervention Global is needed… let the everyday citizen be the Judge based on the spirit of the law (not trickicalities), whilst having the humility to remember that God is the ultimate Judge.
Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. – 1 Corinthians 16:13
Thank you for such a searing, precise, honourable and incredibly needed example of how to hold institutional corruption, evil and (at best) incompetence accountable; to do so firmly, maturely, without malice, with respect, care and the spirit of peace to invite Mr Pybus to step up. I pray he has the wisdom, and is graced with the wisdom by God to take the right course of action. I can imagine Mr Bint being terrified of his lies and his deceptive conduct being exposed. If it helps him to put away his dishonest and manipulative ways, then that can be a very good thing for him, for the Insolvency Service and for this country.
This is a wonderful spearhead in many such cases holding those in positions of great responsibility to account. As you say, we are not limited to the avenues and paths already set out. The PPS UK, Citizen Intervention and The open letter series to President Trump, show how important this is and therefore how serious we are about this.
Thank you James. God bless you and Shaun for the stand in Christ you are taking. I pray for your protection in Jesus’ name.
Brilliant! Clear, concise and a damning letter. Mr Pybus do the right thing
Yet another case of Incompcorruption! This smacks not only of Kids company but of other injustices such as the Post Office scandal. In that situation the Post Office actually used Private Prosecutions against the sub post office masters. These institutions gave virtually unlimited resources against the Everyman so some of those in positions of authority within them become de-facto tyrannical leaders that they would never be able to be otherwise. Public servants need to serve the public!
The line is drawn! There’s no hiding from this heinous corruption. I value the clear highlighting of the issue, it’s evident there are people who will use any means at their disposal to avoid accountability. What a powerful message of intent to organisations that act as if they’re above the law. A big thank you from me for what this represents.
This is the kind of action that the public need to be taking. The arrogance, immoral sense of entitlement and downright cowardice of the Insolvency Service in this case has been extraordinary. This demonstrates just how much the UK’s public services are not and do not serve them at all because of incompetence and corruption. We need Citizen Intervention Global and the Private Prosecution Service to help remind the people sitting in the privileged positions of power in these public institutions that they are not and cannot be allowed to be a law unto themselves, devoid of public accountability.
It takes courage to hold powerful institutions to account publicly. Thank you for your persistence in pursuing transparency and justice in this matter.
This open letter is a vital act of public accountability. The issues raised here go far beyond one case — they expose the deeper failures in how the Insolvency Service and connected institutions operate without sufficient scrutiny. When truth is sidelined and procedural fairness is ignored, public trust is destroyed.
It’s encouraging to see these matters being brought into the open, where they belong. Leadership transparency and personal accountability are essential if justice is ever to be restored. What’s being done here through Citizen Intervention Global and Lighthouse is setting a new standard for how ordinary citizens can stand up against systemic injustice with clarity, evidence, and moral conviction. Thank you, and God bless everyone who is involved in this.
It ought to be standard that if you are a government entity working in the so-called public interest, you are answerable – first and foremost – to the public. I hope that Mr Pybus takes this seriously and acts in accordance with this notice to actually investigate this properly and fairly.