A very well-known regional agent has collapsed owing over £1m.
High-profile Penyards, with a head office in Winchester and eight offices in the south and which largely specialises in upmarket homes, has been the subject of a sale out of administration.
Administrators Begbies Traylor sold the firm and its assets for £180,000 to a firm called No 17 Marketing, one of whose directors is Paul Grant, managing partner of law firm Bernard Chill & Axtell.
The business will trade as Penyards, but it has not taken on the old firm’s debts. The deal means that 32 jobs have been saved.
Graham and Lisa Evans, founders of Penyards whose roots date back over 30 years, are being retained as consultants.
The biggest creditor is HMRC, owed £422,000, while other creditors include Lloyds Bank, owed £232,000, local councils, and newspaper publishers Newsquest – Penyards had been a very prominent advertiser.
Gavin Savage, director of Begbies Traynor’s Southampton office, said Penyards had been hit by increased competition, lower fees and online marketing, the local paper reports.
http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/14520999.Luxury_estate_agent_collapses_owing___1_million/
Comments (20)
180k for a failed business???? – Can only assume they have a MASSIVE lettings book.
Their letting side is a completely separate company, different owners etc, and has been for many years
On the Penyards Website … under ‘Fair Play’ & ‘It is Simply a Matter of Honour’ … they bang on about: “the whole industry is blighted by the wrong doing and ill intentions of the minority. Those people who have little or no regard for the circumstances of others and choose to abuse the privilege of the agreement of which they have made, simply because they can. In many cases the irresponsible actions of this minority audience are, at best, contemptible, and display poor conduct that emanates from greed, self indulgence and outright dishonesty. Where ever possible, will seek to eliminate this from the deal.”
Pot: Kettle: Black comes to mind!
Then, they go on to say: “There are unfortunately elements of this fast moving society where certain individuals are out to achieve self gratification irrespective of the consequences of their actions. I believe this no more evident than in the modern day property market.”
Amen!
“People place their own interests above that of others with an unfair and unreasonable expectation that just problems can happen as long as it does not happen to them. The customary ‘not in my back yard’ mentality.”
AND
As always it is ‘the few that spoil it for the many’. Therefore, other than awareness there perhaps is little purpose in you reading this document. The vast majority of our clients and customers do have high values, principles and integrity and from the outset commit themselves to an honourable process. If you are not amongst that number then we would invite you to take your business to one of the many organisations whose standards are not reflective of the statements contained within this brochure.”
Pass me a hanky!
Bargain for £180,000
… and WHY have they been allowed to keep the same / similar trading name!
Knowing Penyards as I do, their approach and somewhat snooty attitude will be partly to blame for their downfall.
Blaming the internet agents is a rather cheap cop out I think!
Apparently this is a “pre-packaged sale” out of administration … a ‘Phoenix’ company (from the ashes of the old one) … and providing that certain sets of rules are complied with, the liquidator can sell the business to a “connected party.”
In general, this includes selling assets at the ‘best possible price’, having advertised them and marketed them properly (The creditors interests should not compromised) … so there is a duty to investigate the conduct of the directors prior to the liquidation.
Importantly … the trading name of the NEW company should NOT BE THE SAME or SIMILAR to the liquidated company. (Albeit, that this restriction on re-use of a trade name can be lifted if the court agrees) My understanding is that the insolvency service are said to be cracking down on the misuse of new trade names, but objections need to have been heard / raised, within a specific time-frame.
I’m told that pre-packaged administrations ARE getting rarer, as banks will not usually agree a pre-pack to incumbent directors. Also, t’s worth saying that starting a new phoenix company is meant to be a lot harder (especially if ANY of the director has a history of Failed Businesses!)
I won’t mention the unmentionable.
Always sad to see a large business go under, however. Lots of people now jobless. Sad state of affairs.
Not according to the story – 32 jobs saved including the company’s owners.
So happy days for everyone (apart from the tax man, Lloyds Bank and the smaller creditors owed £350,000 between them who will presumably only get an average of 18p in the pound on their debt . . . and Penyards competitors who manage to operate in the same difficult market but pay their way).
On LinkedIn, Penyards state that: “four of the long standing members of staff took up positions as associate directors and acquired a shareholding in the business.” On their website there are just three of them:
Claire Harding – Associate Director, Shareholder PA to MD
Kate Tommans Porter – Associate Director & Shareholder
Vanessa Wrixon – Associate Director & Shareholder
I assume that they have lost their money / stake in the business …. but at least their jobs have been saved (according to the article)
‘I won’t mention the unmentionable.’
That’s not like you, Digital Expert – are you feeling yourself?
I actually think it would be extremely rude of you not to in this instance…
…come on, big boy – let us have it!
Digital Expert hasn’t mentioned Penyards were AM, doesn’t want to be seen as the first one to mention it.
“Gavin Savage, director of Begbies Traynor’s Southampton office, said Penyards had been hit by increased competition, lower fees and online marketing” – is this not the case across the country?
Personally it’s about time the more traditional estate agents actually stopped this rush to the bottom on fees and went back to charging a decent fee for a professional job.
If your unique buying point to the client is simply a low price then there is nothing unique about it at all, you will simply force your competitors to follow you down, destroying any chance of providing a long-term profitable service to the home buying and selling public.
PROPERTY DONE PROPERLY is their strapline … I wonder who else was ‘done’ … apart from HMRC & Lloyds?
As someone who has personally suffered at the hands of a completely different ‘let’s get rid of the dirty washing’ receivership (and let’s start up tomorrow with a clean slate, with the same name) … I shake my head.
Should they really be able to use the same name?
why have they kept the founders as consultant, when company is so heavily in debt.
… and WHY have they been allowed to keep the same / similar trading name!
I politely suggest you may be being a little naive.
Yes, it does.
In these cases I always wonder why, in heaven’s name, does HMRC allow such a debt to accumulate. It’s ridiculous and the fact is WE end up paying for it. HMRC bears considerable responsibility for these types of situations.
… and WHY have they been allowed to keep the same / similar trading name!
Link doesn’t work?