In the end, Mr. Beale, his three colleagues — John Edwards, Nick Stephenson and John Towers — and Kevin Howe, MG Rover’s chief executive, took out £42 million from the company. That doesn’t count the £1.6 million in consulting fees paid to a woman who the report said did little but had a “personal relationship” with Mr. Stephenson.

The British Serious Fraud Office declined to bring charges against the Phoenix Four, who have kept the money. They were, however, barred from serving as corporate directors in Britain. Mr. Beale, who downloaded and ran on his computer a program called “Evidence Eliminator” just before government inspectors arrived, denied he had tried to obstruct the investigation.

The tribunal this week said that Deloitte had failed to take needed steps to avoid conflicts of interest and to make clear to independent directors of MG Rover that it was working for the Phoenix group, not for the company, in its consulting work. To the contrary, the tribunal said, Deloitte made a presentation to the MG Rover board “suggesting they were acting for MG Rover and not the Phoenix Four.” Deloitte said it did make clear to the MG Rover board that it needed to obtain independent advice.

Deloitte was aware of potential conflicts in at least one regard. The government report concluded that in helping to arrange one transaction, it avoided dealing with one interested bank because it was a Deloitte client and involving it might keep Deloitte from being able to collect a £7.5 million contingency fee.

One transaction that outraged investigators later was a deal that transferred the benefit of MG Rover tax losses to another company owned by the Phoenix partners without MG Rover receiving any compensation. Mr. Einollahi told the Financial Reporting Council that he was aware of that fact but not very interested in it. “It was of no concern to me ultimately where the benefit sat, in which company,” he said. “What was of concern to me here is my client is asking me to help turn some losses into value.”

The tribunal concluded that the transaction was not in the interest of MG Rover and that “in those circumstances, the respondents should have considered the public interest in relation to the transaction.”

MG Rover was able to stay in business for a few years thanks to the BMW loan and the sale of its Land Rover business to Ford. But efforts to find a Chinese joint venture partner were unsuccessful and the company failed in 2005, leaving behind £1.3 billion in debt.