As a records management company, we understand the value of keeping accurate records and maintaining proper documentation. We often hear the phrase "gold doesn't glitter when it is a record," and this couldn't be truer. In this article, we explore why it's important to treat records with the same level of care and attention as you would precious metals.
Firstly, just like gold, records have value. Accurate and up-to-date records can help businesses make informed decisions, track their progress, and identify areas for improvement. They can also be used to comply with legal and regulatory requirements, protect intellectual property, and resolve disputes. Without proper documentation, businesses may struggle to prove their case or defend themselves against legal action.
Secondly, just like gold, records need to be secured. Sensitive information contained in records, such as personal information, financial data, and trade secrets, needs to be protected from unauthorized access or theft. Businesses must implement measures such as password protection, encryption, and access controls to ensure that records are secure.
Thirdly, just like gold, records need to be organized. Without proper organization, records can be difficult to find when needed, resulting in wasted time, lost productivity, and missed opportunities. Businesses should implement a system for organizing and categorizing records, which may include naming conventions, folder structures, and document metadata.
Fourthly, just like gold, records need to be managed throughout their lifecycle. Records have a lifecycle that includes creation, distribution, use, storage, and disposal. Businesses must ensure that records are managed appropriately at each stage of the lifecycle to ensure their accuracy, integrity, and authenticity.
Finally, just like gold, records need to be maintained and updated. Records can quickly become outdated or irrelevant if they are not maintained and updated regularly. Businesses must have a system for reviewing and updating records to ensure that they remain accurate and relevant.
In conclusion, records are valuable assets that require the same level of care and attention as precious metals such as gold. Businesses must treat records with the same level of importance and implement measures to secure, organize, manage, and maintain them throughout their lifecycle. Failure to do so can result in negative consequences such as legal action, loss of productivity, and missed opportunities. By treating records as the valuable assets they are, businesses can ensure that they are making informed decisions, complying with regulations, and protecting their assets and reputation.
As a records management company, we understand the importance of having a clear vision for managing records. Without a well-defined vision, it can be difficult to create a plan and strategy for managing documents and information effectively. In this article, we provide guidelines on how to write your records management vision.
Understand your business needs: The first step in developing a records management vision is to understand the specific needs of your business. Consider what types of documents and information your business generates, how they are used, and who needs access to them. This will help you create a vision that is tailored to your business and its unique needs.
Define your goals: Once you understand your business needs, define your goals for managing records. Your goals should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART). Examples of goals may include reducing the amount of physical storage space needed for documents, improving compliance with regulations, or increasing the efficiency of document retrieval.
Identify stakeholders: Identify the stakeholders who will be involved in the records management process, including employees, management, and external vendors. Each stakeholder group may have different needs and perspectives, so it's important to consider their input when developing your vision.
Establish policies and procedures: Develop policies and procedures that outline how documents and information will be managed throughout their lifecycle. This includes guidelines for creating, storing, accessing, and disposing of records. Your policies and procedures should be consistent with industry standards and regulations.
Invest in technology: Invest in technology that will support your records management vision. This may include electronic document management systems (EDMS), scanning solutions, and secure cloud storage. Choose technology that is scalable, secure, and easy to use.
Train your staff: Ensure that your staff is trained on your policies, procedures, and technology. This will help ensure that everyone is on the same page and follows the same processes when it comes to managing records.
Monitor and review: Monitor your records management practices regularly to ensure that they are meeting your goals and objectives. Make changes as necessary and review your vision periodically to ensure that it remains relevant and aligned with your business needs.
In conclusion, a clear and well-defined records management vision is critical for managing documents and information effectively. By following these guidelines, you can develop a vision that is tailored to your business needs and aligns with industry standards and regulations. Remember to involve all stakeholders, invest in technology, and train your staff to ensure that your vision is successful. Finally, monitor and review your practices regularly to ensure that they are meeting your goals and objectives.
As a records management company, we understand the importance of securing documents in a timely manner. However, we have noticed that many individuals and businesses tend to procrastinate when it comes to securing their sensitive documents. We believe that waiting to secure your documents can lead to potential harm and negative consequences down the line.
One of the main risks of waiting to secure documents is the potential for loss or theft. Sensitive documents, such as financial records, employee data, and customer information, are prime targets for thieves and cybercriminals. Waiting too long to secure these documents can increase the risk of them falling into the wrong hands, which can result in financial loss, reputational damage, and legal consequences.
Another risk of delaying the securement of documents is the potential for damage. Natural disasters such as floods, fires, or storms can strike unexpectedly, and without proper safeguards in place, documents can be destroyed or damaged beyond repair. If these documents are important for legal or financial reasons, their loss can be devastating, resulting in lawsuits, fines, or loss of business.
Moreover, waiting to secure documents can also lead to non-compliance with laws and regulations. Many industries are subject to strict rules regarding document retention and destruction, and failure to comply with these regulations can lead to hefty fines or legal action. Waiting too long to secure documents can lead to missed deadlines and lost opportunities to comply with these regulations.
Furthermore, waiting to secure documents can create an organizational nightmare. Without proper management and organization, documents can quickly pile up and become difficult to locate or access when needed. This can result in wasted time, reduced productivity, and missed opportunities. By taking the time to secure and organize documents, businesses can streamline their operations and improve their efficiency.
In conclusion, waiting to secure documents can result in a wide range of negative consequences, including theft, damage, non-compliance with regulations, and organizational inefficiencies. Businesses should take proactive measures to secure and organize their documents in a timely manner, which can lead to increased security, improved efficiency, and better compliance with laws and regulations. At a minimum, businesses should consider working with a reputable records management company to help manage and secure their documents. By doing so, they can ensure that their sensitive information is protected and organized in a secure and efficient manner.
As a records management company, we understand the importance of storing documents in a secure and organized manner. However, we have noticed that many individuals and businesses still use their offices as a storage space for important documents. We believe that this is not the right approach and can lead to various issues down the line.
First and foremost, storing documents in the office can take up valuable space that could be used for other purposes. In addition, it can create a cluttered and disorganized workspace, which can negatively impact productivity and increase the risk of misplacing or losing important documents.
Moreover, keeping physical documents in the office can also pose a security risk. In the event of a break-in or theft, sensitive information could be compromised. Additionally, if documents are not properly secured, they may be accessible to unauthorized personnel, which can lead to privacy breaches and legal consequences.
It is also worth noting that documents stored in the office are not easily accessible to those who need them. When documents are needed, employees may waste time searching through piles of papers or filing cabinets to locate them. This can be frustrating and time-consuming, especially when deadlines are looming.
On the other hand, by outsourcing document storage to a reputable records management company, businesses can ensure that their documents are stored in a secure and organized manner. These companies use state-of-the-art technology to ensure that documents are protected from theft, loss, or damage. Additionally, records management companies offer efficient retrieval and delivery services, ensuring that documents can be accessed quickly and easily.
Outsourcing document storage can also lead to cost savings. Renting office space to store documents can be expensive, especially in urban areas where space is at a premium. Additionally, businesses may need to invest in additional equipment, such as filing cabinets or shredders, to manage their documents in-house. By outsourcing document storage, businesses can eliminate these expenses and save money in the long run.
In conclusion, your office is not the right place to store your documents. It can take up valuable space, create a cluttered workspace, pose security risks, and make documents difficult to access. Outsourcing document storage to a records management company can help businesses save money, increase productivity, and ensure that their sensitive information is protected at all times.
Digitizing records correctly isn’t as easy as it sounds. Special equipment and staff trained in indexing and metadata tagging best practices. If you want the job done right, outsourcing to a vendor is your best bet.
The benefits of small businesses from outsourcing digitization are
1. Use Experts, Get Expert Results
Digital records are easier to search and faster to find, but that’s only true if they have been indexed and tagged accurately using metadata. To ensure every scanned record has the correct metadata, you need a knowledgeable digitization specialist dedicated to meticulous detail.
2. Avoid A Capital Investment
Not all scanners are built the same. If you want high-definition scans of your most valuable assets, there are few options for spending a lot of money and time. Purchasing professional-grade scanning equipment and software are expensive. Imaging documents is time-consuming and draws your resources away from their core work. Outsourcing makes digitization fast and more economical.
3. Avoid Missing of Records
Any time a team digitizes in-house, with multiple people handling documents and moving
between locations, there’s always the chance of records getting lost. An outsourced solution mitigates sensitive document risks through a single, secure chain of custody.
4. Ensure Information Governance and Regulatory Compliance
It’s difficult for in-house teams to keep up with changing retention, content classification, and privacy laws. Outsourcing can add the specialized expertise you need to keep your governance policies and practices within bounds and avoid costly mistakes.
5. Right-size your project
Digitization isn’t an all-or-nothing endeavor. There are different levels for different digitization projects. Choose a vendor that can scale the scope of digitization to your small business needs.
Kayman is a records management company that provides digitization services to clients across industries. Kayman is equipped with trained people and a state-of-the-art facility that can digitize documents from organizations of any size. If you want to know more about digitization services, contact us at info@kaymanvaults.com.
Any document that is generated in an organization has a life cycle. Managing the document from its creation to disposition requires planning. One of the significant components in the planning is the “Retention and Shredding Schedule.” This schedule lets the organization know the documents to be kept, the period for which they should be kept, and when they should be destroyed. Industries like Banking, Healthcare, and law firms have regulatory constraints they should adhere to. Stringent regulations like GDPR in the EU have elevated the need for retention schedules.
Benefits
· Mitigate non-compliance risks
· Increase productivity by reducing the time in searching records
· Have control over documents
· Prevent misuse after the end of life
Kayman vaults assist organizations with industry-specific retention and shredding schedules and ensure better compliance. With competency in records management and shredding, Kayman has served organizations across industries with such retention schedules. It also has a state-of-the-art facility for storing and shredding records. Kayman develops the retention and shredding schedules with industrial, state, and central laws in mind. Once the client approves the schedule, Kayman will shred or pick the documents giving you peace of mind. If your organization needs retention/shredding, contact us at info@kaymanvaults.com.
Most businesses don’t realize that records shredding is a serious exercise. They simply allocate few internal staff members to get it over with. However, the risks and cost implications of these in-house shredding processes may be significantly higher than originally understood.
Let’s look at some reasons on why onsite or in-house document shredding is riskier and not preferred.
Cost implications of In-House Shredding
On the outset, it may look as if records shredding internally using few spare resources might look cheaper. It may be right to some extent if the volume of records you maintain is very low. Beyond a point it is definitely not recommended as the actual cost of shredding is more than it appears to be.
Businesses don’t calculate the useful and other productive tasks those shredding team members could have done. The next dependency is to have someone to monitor and moderate the exercise. The cost of this person with a higher responsibility needs to be accounted for.
Risk of Identity Theft
In-house records shredding may not have required resources allocated to monitor through the whole shredding exercise. This leaves space for misuse of the information especially if your business maintains consumer data. Anyone can simply start impersonating others when they get control over sensitive contact and other personal details. Worst nightmare in this situation is that this cannot be controlled.
A well planned and monitored process of shredding at an exclusive offshore records storage facility will guarantee accountability and integrity to the desired data security standards.
Risks of Information Leaks
In an unmonitored records shredding process there are high chances of Information leaks. This is serious as it can compromise important details that may disrupt other businesses or stall your business operations. Whether it is accidental or intentional the risks associated with such poorly planned records shredding process is completely yours. If a competitor or an individual gets hold of this leaked information the chances of them using this against the goodwill of your business is very high. It can attract bad PR, Penal Actions, Lawsuits and even losing clients.
Legal Implications
Maintaining records and Shredding unwanted records is a legal requirement for any business. While doing so there are specific certification processes to be followed. In-house records shredding will not help in getting an authenticated certificate of records destruction. Not only the outcome, but also the systematic way in which records shredding projects are executed may be understood. Any records keeping audit from the regulatory bodies will bring these details into light and it may attract legal complications.
Understanding all the above cost implications and business risks associated with records-shredding businesses need to take an informed decision of whether they are deciding on in-house shredding or offsite records shredding.
Advantages of offsite records shredding
Outsourcing such a sensitive responsibility to a dedicated records shredding services provider will be a good choice as they possess experience, maintains confidentiality, gives you confidence of meeting records shredding compliance the right way. KAYMAN Records Management is a trusted records digitization company in Chennai, India who have helped lots of industry businesses with their documents shredding needs. They do have a sophisticated records storage facility in Chennai where you can consider storing and shredding your physical files in a secure manner.
The NCLAT has dismissed the plea of Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd to initiate insolvency proceedings against its creditor Fly Express Logistics. A three-member bench of the appellate tribunal upheld the earlier orders of the Allahabad bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which had on April 5, 2022, rejected the plea of Hinduja Leyland Finance.
The NCLT had said the date of default was December 24, 2022 which falls within prohibition period mentioned in Section 10 A of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and no petition can ever be filed for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) for a default occurring in such period. This was challenged by the Hinduja Group firm before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) contending that December 24, 2022 was wrongly mentioned as the date of default in the petition before NCLT. It wanted to file an amendment application but since the petition was dismissed by NCLT on the first day of the hearing, it could not do so, contended Hinduja Leyland Finance.
However, the appellate tribunal also rejected the petition of Hinduja Leyland Finance after observing that December 24, 2022 was clearly mentioned as the date of default. "We have perused the Section 7 Application 'date of default' is clearly mentioned in Part-IV as 24.12.2022 hence the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) is not in error in rejecting the Application, thus we do not find any ground to entertain the Appeal," said the bench headed by Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan.
However, it also said Hinduja Leyland Finance was at liberty to initiate a fresh proceeding under Section 7 on appropriate materials in accordance with the law. Under Section 7 of the IBC, a financial creditor can get insolvency proceedings initiated against the corporate debtor concerned.
Incorporated on November 12, 2008 Hinduja Leyland Finance provides loans for the purchase of commercial and personal vehicles in the primary as well as the secondary market of used vehicles.
The Supreme Court observed that the provisions of Section 18 of the Limitation Act are applicable to proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
An acknowledgement in a balance sheet without a qualification can furnish a legitimate basis for determining as to whether the period of limitation would stand extended, so long as the acknowledgement was within a period of three years from the original date of default, the bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant observed.
In this case, the National Company Law Tribunal rejected the application filed by the State Bank of India under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process on the ground of limitation. It held that a statement contained in the balance sheet cannot be treated as an acknowledgement of liability under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. While upholding this order, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal held that recourse to Section 18 of the Limitation Act [Effect of acknowledgment in writing] was not available.
While considering the appeals filed against these orders, the Apex court bench noted that the judgments relied on by the NCLT/NCLAT has been specifically overruled by the Supreme Court. Referring to Laxmi Pat Surana v Union Bank of India (2021) 8 SCC 481, Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited v Bishal Jaiswal (2021) 6 SCC 366, Sesh Nath Singh v Baidyabati Sheoraphuli Coop. Bank Ltd. (2021) 7 SCC 313 and other judgments , the bench observed:
Therefore, the bench allowed the appeal and restored the proceedings back to the NCLT for fresh adjudication. Case details State Bank of India vs Krishidhan Seeds Private Limited | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 497 | CA 910 of 2021 | 18 April 2022
Coram: Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant Counsel: Sr. Adv Niranjan Reddy for appellant, Sr. Adv Shyam Divan for respondent
Source: https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-section-18-limitation-act-ibc-proceedings-state-bank-of-india-vs-krishidhan-seeds-private-limited-2022-livelaw-sc-497-199499
Supreme Court in the case of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority versus Anand Sonbhadra held that the NOIDA is an operational creditor under the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. (IBC/Code)
The Bench comprising of Justice KM Joseph and Justice Hrishikesh Roy dismissed the appeal filed by NOIDA against the judgment of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) wherein NCLAT held that the NOIDA is an operational Creditor under IBC and cannot be considered as a Financial Creditor
of the Corporate Debtor under the provisions of the Code.
National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Bench IV, New Delhi while adjudicating an application filed by NOIDA held that the NOIDA is an operational creditor as there is no financial lease executed between NOIDA and the Corporate Debtor as per the Indian accounting standards and the same was affirmed by NCLAT vide order dated 16.04.2021 whereas the NCLT, Principal Bench, New Delhi in another case held that the NOIDA is a Financial Creditor and the order was stayed by NCLAT.
NOIDA filed an appeal against both these orders passed by NCLAT and a question was framed by the Supreme Court as to "Whether the appellant is entitled to be treated as a financial creditor within the meaning of the IBC"
Whether NOIDA Is A Financial Creditor Under Section 5(8)(D) Of IBC.
NOIDA contended before the Supreme Court that the lease deed executed between the NOIDA and Corporate Debtor is a financial lease as per the Indian Accounting Standard and therefore by the virtue of Section 5(8)d) of IBC, NOIDA qualifies as a Financial Creditor.
Section 5(8)(d) read as follows; "Section 5(8)(d)- "the amount of any liability in respect of any lease or hire purchase contract which is deemed as a finance or capital lease under the Indian Accounting Standards or such other accounting standards as may be prescribed;"
The Supreme Court made a roving inquiry into the various rules of the Indian Accounting Standards which define the characteristics of a financial Lease. Supreme Court referred to Rule 63 of the IAS which states that a lease will be a financial lease if the term of the lease is for the major part of the economic life of the underlying assets, even if the title is not transferred. The Supreme Court held that the lease in question is for a period of ninety years and the principle of the economic life of the underlying asset which is the "land" is inapposite in the present case. "…The economic life of land is not limited. The principle in the said situation is predicated with reference to measuring the economic life of an asset. More importantly, it speaks of the major part of the economic life of the asset. Both these concepts are inapposite and even inapplicable with regard to land. Land does not depreciate with the passage of time. Ordinarily, the price of land would only increase, unlike other assets"
The Supreme Court further held that; "…It may not be possible to hold that the lease is for the major part of the economic life of the land. It cannot be said that at the expiry of 90 years the land will cease to be economically usable. Therefore, we cannot accept the argument of the appellant that after 90 years appellant would not get the empty parcel of land and the land would not be of any commercial use to the appellant after the expiry of the lease."
Thereafter, the Supreme Court examined the contention of NOIDA based on Rule 62 and 65 of IAS which states that a lease may be classified as a financial lease if it transfers substantially all the risks and rewards incidental to the ownership of the underlying asset and held that all rewards incidental to the ownership are not transferred to the lessee by NOIDA and thus the conditions of Rule 62 and 65 do not meet in the present scenario and therefore, NOIDA cannot be considered as a Financial Creditor under Section 5(8)(d) of IBC.
However, Supreme Court made an interesting observation hinting toward a prospective amendment by the Central Government to classify NOIDA as a Financial Creditor and held that;
"Therefore, we would find on the whole that the appellant is not the financial lessor under section 5(8)(d) of the IBC. No doubt we would observe that we have arrived at the findings based on the prevailing statutory regime. Needless to say, there is always power to amend the provisions which essentially consist of the Indian Accounting Standards in the absence of any rules prescribed under Section 5(8)(d) of the IBC by the Central Government"
Source:https://www.livelaw.in/ibc-cases/supreme-court-noida-insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-nclat-national-company-law-tribunal-nclt-financial-creditor-199363?infinitescroll=1
