OX4 PROPERTIES LIMITED
Company number 04599489 · Monitor this company
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.
1. Credit Opinion: CONDITIONAL
OX4 Properties Limited presents a highly constrained credit profile due to its micro-entity status, lack of profit and loss visibility, and a severely diminished balance sheet. While the company has a long trading history since 2002 and maintains a positive net asset position, it has undergone a dramatic contraction from holding over £1.5 million in total assets in 2015 to just £47,175 in 2024. The company currently holds no fixed assets, which is highly unusual for a business classified under real estate letting and operating (SIC 68209).
Credit approval cannot be granted on an unsecured basis due to the opaque trading performance and minimal equity cushion. Any facility should be CONDITIONAL on tangible security or an unlimited personal guarantee from the director and ultimate beneficial owner, Mr Mohammed Arshad, subject to satisfactory personal credit checks.
2. Financial Strength
The balance sheet health is fragile and presents a legacy of significant asset depletion: * Equity Cushion: Net assets stand at a modest £25,106 (2023: £24,921), representing a stagnant and negligible equity base for a property company. * Asset Stripping/Divestment: Between 2016 and 2022, the company divested or transferred out substantial assets (total assets fell from £1.2m to £27k). Crucially, cash reserves plummeted from £869k in 2016 to nil in recent years, and all fixed assets (presumably property) have been removed from the balance sheet. * Leverage: Current liabilities (£20,522) are entirely supported by current assets (£47,175). However, with no fixed assets, the company has zero collateral to secure bank lending against. * Recent Capital Injection: In 2023, current assets jumped from £27,244 to £46,153, funded almost entirely by a spike in creditors from £1,000 to £20,522. This suggests a related-party loan or director injection rather than organic trading profit, especially given the absence of a P&L.
3. Cash Flow Assessment
Assessing cash flow generation is severely limited by the company's use of micro-entity filing exemptions, which suppresses the profit and loss account and cash flow statement. * Liquidity Position: On paper, liquidity appears adequate with a current ratio of 2.3x (£47,175 / £20,522). Net current assets are £26,653. * Quality of Current Assets: Without notes to the accounts, we cannot verify if the £47,175 in current assets represents readily available cash or illiquid debtors. Given the SIC code is for real estate, it is highly likely these are rental debtors or loan notes rather than cash. * Creditor Stickiness: The creditor balance remained exactly £20,522 in both 2023 and 2024. This static nature strongly implies a non-commercial, related-party liability (e.g., a director's loan) rather than trade payables, which typically fluctuate. This liability could be called upon at any time, threatening the company's solvency. * Operational Cash Flow: With only one employee (likely the director), overheads are minimal, but the company's ability to service external debt from operational cash flows is entirely unproven by the filed accounts.
4. Monitoring Points
If a facility is granted subject to guarantees, the following covenants and monitoring actions should be implemented: * Related Party Exposure: Clarification is required on the £20,522 creditor. If this is a director's loan, subordination agreements must be obtained to ensure the bank's debt ranks prior to the director's unsecured claims. * Personal Guarantee Validation: An unlimited personal guarantee from Mr Mohammed Arshad is mandatory. Personal affordability assessments must be conducted, as the corporate shell lacks the capacity to absorb losses. * Asset Realisation Risk: Monitor for any further changes in the composition of current assets. If the £47k is owed by related parties, the liquidity buffer is illusory. * Filing Compliance: The company has maintained a good filing record, but as a micro-entity, the information asymmetry risk is high. Any downgrade in filing timeliness should trigger an immediate review.