Question 1

How do I tell quickly whether an adviser knows the subject?

Accepted Answer

Ask them to give you the number of the official notice the conclusion rests on. An adviser who knows the subject will name the source and let you check it. If all you hear is "we have the connections" or "this is how everyone does it",be careful.

Question 2

Quotes differ by several times over. Where is the difference?

Accepted Answer

In scope and who answers for it:whether the ongoing obligations afterwards are covered,who is responsible when something goes wrong,and whether one-off fees and continuing fees are set out separately. Compare totals without comparing scope and you tend to buy the kind of service that disappears once the paperwork is done.

Question 3

An adviser suggests nominee shareholding to solve the shareholding problem. Should I listen?

Accepted Answer

No. Nominee shareholders are a clear compliance red line. The proper routes are to check the list,or go through BOI or a foreign business licence. An adviser who is willing to recommend the red line to you is itself a risk signal.

Question 4

Can an adviser be believed when they guarantee approval?

Accepted Answer

That is a warning sign in itself. Tier decisions and approvals are made at the authority's discretion under the rules as they currently stand,and comparable projects land differently depending on the documents,the timing and the quality of the reasoning — anything that could be guaranteed would not need approving. Conversely,someone who volunteers "I cannot guarantee that outcome" usually has a clearer sense of where the boundary sits.

Question 5

How should I read "we have connections, we can get it through"?

Accepted Answer

That sentence cannot be written into a contract,and it will carry no responsibility for you when something goes wrong. What genuinely shortens a timeline is work that can be written into the scope:documents complete first time,queries answered the same day,questions handled at interview. A promise that substitutes connections for conditions is buying you uncertainty.

Question 6

Three quotes differ several times over. Is somebody inflating?

Accepted Answer

Usually not — the three quotes are pricing three different pieces of work. Before looking at the numbers,look at whether four boundaries are stated:what counts as finished,whether continuing obligations are covered,who is responsible if something is wrong,and whether one-off and ongoing fees are separated. Put those four into one sheet and have all three fill in included / not included / charged separately,and the gap usually explains itself on the spot.

Question 7

Where does the cheapest quote usually economise?

Accepted Answer

Rarely on profit — usually on people and on responsibility:classification reasoning replaced by a template,follow-up on queries excluded (charged separately when a notice arrives),no professional translation of technical documents,and no outcome or liability terms in the contract. Translation is the item most underestimated — if the technical substance does not survive into the translated text,the tier assessment drops a band,and that difference can be many times the fee saved.

Question 8

What should a quotation actually contain?

Accepted Answer

Four things:government fees and professional fees listed separately (blended into one figure,you cannot judge what the service is worth);stated deliverables (specific documents,forms,reports — "assistance with the process" is not a deliverable);stated assumptions and exclusions (what triggers an additional charge);and staged payments tied to milestones rather than to elapsed time.

Question 9

"No win, no fee" sounds attractive. Is there a catch?

Accepted Answer

It depends on the matter. Where the amount is determinate and the outcome verifiable — a tax refund,for instance — a success fee is reasonable,but the contract must state how success is defined (approval obtained,or money received) and how work already done is treated if it fails. Where the outcome is itself a matter of discretion,a no-win-no-fee wrapper usually means the adviser will take the easy matters,talk you out of the hard ones,or take risks with the documents.

Question 10

What must the contract say, as a minimum?

Accepted Answer

Three sentences are enough:what the deliverables are (specific documents,not "assistance with the process");what happens if rework or loss is caused by the adviser;and what falls outside the scope,and how it will be agreed if it arises. Adding these before signing takes a sentence each;adding them after something has gone wrong usually cannot be done at all.

Question 11

We are halfway through. Can we still change adviser?

Accepted Answer

Yes,but the cost is not the fee — it is the documents and the schedule. Three moments are bad ones to change:inside a window for responding to a query (the response is time-limited and a mid-course change very easily overruns it),with an interview already scheduled,and close to a hard deadline. The safer window is just after one stage closes and before the next begins.

Question 12

What gets lost most easily when changing adviser?

Accepted Answer

Three things you must get back:the complete set of documents as actually submitted (not the final PDF — the incoming adviser needs to know what has already been said on your behalf);the accounts and authorisation status in each official system;and an accurate picture of what is in progress and the next date falling due. The second is the one most often overlooked — accounts were put in the adviser's name for convenience at the outset,and it emerges at handover that they cannot be recovered. Write "accounts and authorisations belong to the client" into the engagement at the start.

Choosing the wrong adviser costs more than the adviser's fee