FIRST CHOICE FACILITIES SERVICES LIMITED

Company number 02745561 ·

In Administration

This analysis was written by an AI from the company's public filings. It may contain errors or omissions and is not financial or professional advice.

Credit Analysis: FIRST CHOICE FACILITIES SERVICES LIMITED

1. Credit Opinion: DECLINE

This company is IN ADMINISTRATION. No credit facility should be considered. The company is under the control of court-appointed administrators, indicating formal insolvency proceedings have commenced. Any existing exposure should be referred immediately to the bank's distressed debt team.

The fundamental basis for extending credit — a viable counterparty capable of honouring obligations — no longer exists. The administration appointment confirms the company cannot meet its debts as they fall due.


2. Financial Strength: CRITICAL / INSOLVENT

The balance sheet has been in persistent deterioration:

Period Net Assets Cash Shareholders' Funds
YE Feb 2018 £31,967 £62,074 £31,967
YE Feb 2019 -£298,656 £33,646 -£300,056
YE Feb 2020 -£150,127 £202 -£151,527
YE Feb 2022 -£260,000 (approx) Not disclosed Net liability position

Key observations:

  • Technical insolvency: The company has operated with negative net assets since at least 2019. Net liabilities of approximately £260k in FY22 represent a significant deficit.
  • Cash collapse: Cash reserves deteriorated from £62k (2018) to just £202 (2020) — effectively no liquidity buffer.
  • Leverage: Total liabilities exceeded total assets substantially. The FY22 accounts reference total assets of £6m, but this appears inflated by current assets (likely trade receivables on extended terms) which are clearly not realisable at book value given the subsequent administration.
  • Share capital: Only £1,400 — negligible equity cushion.
  • Qualified audit opinion: Auditors were unable to verify stock balances for both FY21 and FY22, indicating material internal control weaknesses and potential asset overstatement.

3. Cash Flow Assessment: FAILED

  • Operating losses: Despite 19% turnover growth to approximately £13.7m in FY22, the company recorded a pre-tax loss of £159k and post-tax loss of £167k. EBITDA declined from £500k to £300k.
  • Overhead escalation: Overheads increased by £780k (from 15% to 18% of turnover), consuming the gross profit improvement entirely.
  • Working capital distress: The strategic report explicitly acknowledges "liquidity and cash flow risk... primarily attributable to its trade receivables with a number of clients on extended payment terms due to the fall out of Covid-19." Aged receivables were clearly a critical issue.
  • Director support dependency: Going concern was predicated on the director continuing to provide financial support — an unsustainable position that ultimately failed given the administration filing.
  • No institutional debt capacity: A company in net liability position with negligible cash cannot service additional debt obligations.

4. Monitoring Points

While no monitoring is required for new facilities (the decision is DECLINE), for any residual or connected exposure:

  • Administration progress: Monitor administrator appointments, creditor meetings, and realisation of assets. The registered office has changed to Arcadia House (from Prince Albert House in the accounts), likely reflecting the administrator's appointment.
  • Connected entities: Mr and name shown to subscribers may have interests in other companies. Any connected-party exposure should be flagged for review given the failure of this entity.
  • Director conduct: No disqualification records are noted, but the administration may generate findings. Monitor Insolvency Service records.
  • Preferential creditor claims: The bank should ensure any security is properly registered and enforceable. Unsecured creditors in administration typically receive minimal returns.

Summary Assessment

Factor Rating
Payment Capability Failed — In Administration
Financial Trajectory Terminal decline — Persistent losses, negative net worth
Business Resilience None — Pandemic exposure, client concentration, cash collapse
Management Quality Poor — Over-reliance on director support, qualified audit, ultimately failed

Names of the people mentioned are shown to subscribers. See subscription

Perspective: Business Credit Analyst · Model: glm-5.1 · Generated 11 September 2026