No ‘viable offers’ for Hartley Pensions Sipp book

Joint administrators of the business say they have begun an ‘orderly wind down’ of the operation

|

The joint administrators of pensions firm Hartley Pensions said they have failed to find a buyer for its self-invested personal pension (Sipp) business.

Peter Kubik and Brian Johnson of UHY Hacker Young gave an update of the administration of Hartley Pensions in a progress report for the period of 29 July 2022 to 28 January 2023.

They said: “Prior to the administration, discussions had commenced with interested parties for the potential purchase of the Sipp and small self-administered scheme (Ssas) books.

“In respect of the Ssas book, the interested party undertook further due diligence during the review period, and we are awaiting details of the queries which subsequently arose. It is hoped that a sale would be completed within the next two-to-three months.

“Unfortunately, no viable offer was received in respect of the Sipp book as, following due diligence undertaken by interested parties, it became clear that no reconciliations of the schemes had been undertaken as and when new books were acquired by the company.

“Therefore, no interested party was in a position to purchase the books as the unknown risk was unquantifiable. As a result, an orderly wind down of the Sipp book is being progressed with a full reconciliation being undertaken.”

In July 2022, Sipp operator Hartley Pensions was placed into administration at the request of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

This came after the FCA told the firm it cannot accept any new clients and then the company asked the regulator to enforce requirements preventing it from accepting ongoing contributions into Sipps as well as to temporarily stop it carrying out transfers.

Loan

The joint administrators also said in the progress report that they are considering whether legal action should be commenced to recover a loan made by the Sipp provider to the Irish entity of the Wilton Group, which is the parent company of Hartley Pensions.

The following transactions were identified by the joint adminstrators in the company’s records which we were advised was a loan:

  • €230,056 (£204,631, $242,905) paid to or on behalf of Wilton & Partners (W&P) on or around 31 August 2021;
  • €1.1m paid to or on behalf of W&P on or around 31 August 2021;
  • €174,766.50 paid to or on behalf of W&P on or around 30 September 2021;
  • €150,000 received from or on behalf of W&P on or around 30 November 2021.

The joint administrators were provided with a loan agreement dated 14 July 2022 between the Hartley Pensions, W&P and Wilton Group.

The loan agreement stated that:

  • Clause 4.1 – The loans would be repaid upon the creation of a Wilton controlled pensions holding company to be known as ‘Guinness Mahon’, when the loans will be capitalised by new shares in the new pensions holding company;
  • Clause 4.2 – In the event that repayment is not made in terms of Clause 4.1 above, the loans will be repaid from the sale of Bespoke Trustees Limited; and
  • Clause 4.3 – The lenders agree that repayment of the loans cannot be demanded other than in terms contained in this Clause 4.

Joint administrators Kubik and Johnson said: “It should be noted that the agreement was dated two weeks prior to the company being placed into administration and, despite requesting documentation to support the above was the intention at the time of loan, no supporting evidence has been provided and no documents have been identified in the company’s records.

“W&P were therefore contacted to advise that the transaction was a transaction at an undervalue and preference in accordance with sections 238 and 239 of the Insolvency Act 1989 and was required to be repaid.

“Following a meeting with the company’s director during the review period, who is also a director of W&P, it was agreed that a sale of Bespoke Trustees Limited would be undertaken to allow the loan to be repaid. Whilst this was agreed, we are not aware of any actions having been taken to progress a sale. We are therefore considering whether legal action should be commenced for recovery of the monies.”