PHOENIX SOFT DRINKS LIMITED
Company number 03152694 · 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.
Credit Analysis: PHOENIX SOFT DRINKS LIMITED
1. Credit Opinion: DECLINE
Reasoning: This entity is classified as dormant with SIC code 99999 and has filed dormant accounts under Section 480 of the Companies Act 2006. The company has had no trading activity, no revenue generation, no employees, and negligible assets (£576) for multiple consecutive years. There is absolutely no capacity to service debt obligations or honor commercial agreements. Any credit facility would be entirely unsupported by cash flows or meaningful asset coverage.
2. Financial Strength
Assessment: Extremely Weak
| Metric | FY2025 | FY2024 | FY2020 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shareholders' Funds | £576 | £576 | £576 |
| Share Capital | £100 | £100 | £100 |
| Retained Earnings | £476 | £476 | £476 |
- Balance sheet is essentially inert. Total assets have remained flat at £576 since at least FY2020, consisting solely of "Other debtors" — likely an inter-company or director balance with no realisable value for creditors.
- Prior to 2020, shareholders' funds were £2,504, suggesting a write-down or distribution occurred around that time, reducing the already minimal equity base further.
- No tangible assets are held. No cash, no property, no plant or equipment. The debtor balance of £576 is the only asset — highly illiquid and of negligible recovery value.
- Share capital of £100 indicates the company was never capitalised for meaningful operations.
3. Cash Flow Assessment
Assessment: Non-existent
- Zero trading revenue across all periods reviewed. The company generates no operating cash flow whatsoever.
- No cash balances reported since FY2019 (when £0 was held). Previously, only nominal amounts existed (£52-£116).
- No working capital cycle to evaluate — there are no trade debtors, no trade creditors, no stock, and no operational activity.
- Liquidity is effectively nil. The company cannot meet any financial obligations from its own resources.
4. Monitoring Points
If circumstances change and this entity approaches the bank for facilities, the following would require scrutiny:
| Area | Risk Factor |
|---|---|
| Dormant Status | Verify whether the company intends to reactivate and what business plan supports any borrowing request |
| Inter-company Balances | The £576 debtor may be owed by a connected party — establish nature and recoverability |
| Group Structure | Mr Adrian Scott Turton has significant influence/control; investigate whether related entities provide any support |
| Historical Activity | Company was incorporated in 1996 and previously held £2,504 in equity — determine what business was previously conducted and why it ceased |
| Related Party Transactions | Assess whether directors have withdrawn funds or transferred assets out of the business |
| Reactivation Viability | Any future lending would require a robust business plan, projected cash flows, and likely personal guarantees given the shell nature of this entity |
Additional Observations
- Management Quality: Minimal stewardship evidence available. Filing is compliant (no overdue filings), but this is a low bar for a dormant entity with no operations to manage.
- Business Resilience: Non-applicable. The company has no trading activity to be resilient against.
- Connected Interests: Tracy Jill Turton serves as both director and secretary; Adrian Scott Turton is the PSC with significant influence. The family connection suggests this may be a vehicle within a wider group structure — any credit assessment should consider the broader picture.