Risk Analysis: BRYNGYDFA WIND FARM LIMITED

1. Risk Rating: HIGH

Justification: This company has operated with negative net assets for at least a decade, with liabilities consistently exceeding assets and the deficit worsening each year. The balance sheet shows net liabilities of £9,768 as at August 2025, up from £6,215 in 2016, representing a steady erosion of an already insolvent position. Additionally, there are significant governance concerns regarding the PSC register and an apparent contradiction between a director being listed as current while their executor holds significant control.

2. Key Concerns

a) Persistent Technical Insolvency The company has carried negative net assets every year across the entire 10-year review period. The deficit has grown from £6,215 (2016) to £9,768 (2025), indicating a structural inability to generate sufficient returns to cover obligations. Current liabilities (£256,330) exceed current assets (£246,562), meaning the company cannot cover its short-term debts from its balance sheet. There is no indication of long-term creditor support or parent company guarantees that might explain how this position is sustained.

b) Static Asset Base Raises Material Questions Total assets have remained at exactly £246,562 for four consecutive years (2022–2025), with only a £68 change between 2021 and 2022. For a company classified under SIC code 42220 (construction of utility projects for electricity and telecommunications) with the word "Wind Farm" in its name, the complete absence of fixed assets on the balance sheet is highly unusual. Wind farm operations would typically involve significant capital assets (turbines, infrastructure, land). This pattern suggests either: the assets are held elsewhere in a group structure, the company is dormant in practice despite filing as active, or there are potential classification concerns in the accounts.

c) PSC and Director Governance Discrepancy The PSC register identifies "Executor of Christopher Robert Thomas" as holding 25-50% of shares and voting rights with significant influence or control. This strongly implies Mr Thomas is deceased. However, the officer list records Christopher Robert Thomas as a "Current" director. This inconsistency raises questions about whether board decisions have been properly authorised, whether the PSC register is accurate, and whether the executor is exercising control appropriately. It also creates uncertainty about the company's decision-making framework.

3. Positive Indicators

• Filing Compliance: Both accounts and confirmation statements are up to date with no overdue filings. The 2025 accounts were approved and signed on 15 May 2026, ahead of the May 2027 deadline, indicating administrative discipline.
• Longevity: The company has been operational since 2008 (nearly 17 years), suggesting some form of sustainable operating model, even if the balance sheet appears precarious.
• Stable Creditor Position: While liabilities exceed assets, the creditor balance has increased only modestly year-on-year (approximately £300-£350 per annum), suggesting creditors are not calling in debts and the company may have long-standing, patient creditors—possibly related parties.
• No Disqualification Orders: None of the current directors appear on the disqualification register based on available information.

4. Due Diligence Notes