Competition watchdog to investigate takeover of NHS landlord Assura
Last month, rival healthcare property firm PHP (Primary Health Properties) put forward a fourth takeover offer for Assura worth £1.79 billion following a lengthy bidding war.
PHP had previously laid down a £1.68 billion bid in May but was outbid by a rival suitor, with a consortium led by US private equity firm KKR valuing the business at £1.7 billion.
Bosses at Assura backed the £1.79 billion deal, suggesting the increased scale of the combined business would benefit shareholders of both companies.
On Friday, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said it is now 'investigating' the deal to gather information and could launch a formal phase one investigation.
It said the companies and others potentially impacted by the deal have two weeks to provide submissions regarding the move.
The regulator said it is looking at whether the takeover 'may be expected to result in a substantial lessening of competition' in the healthcare sector.
Following submissions, the regulator will then decide whether the deal is in the jurisdiction of the CMA to complete the phase one probe and then whether a more thorough investigation needs to take place.
PHP's rival bidder KKR had cautioned that the deal, which is combining the two largest UK healthcare real estate firms, could attract scrutiny from the CMA.
Assura owns more than 600 buildings, including doctors' surgeries, with a portfolio valued at around £3.1 billion. It has about 80 members of staff.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
23 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘I'm cash-poor but don't want to sell my home. Will my inheritance plan work?'
Receive personalised tips on how to improve your financial situation, for free. Here's how to apply or fill in the form below. Patricia Lowe finds herself in a position many other pensioners are bound to recognise – asset-rich and cash-poor. The 79-year-old wants to give £250k to her sons to spend now rather than as part of a future inheritance, but her pensions only pay a combined income of around £40k per year. One solution might be to downsize – the former adoption social worker first moved into her seven-bedroom home in Shropshire in 1981. With its striking red-brick Victorian architecture, sizeable garden and convenient walking distance from the heart of Shrewsbury, the property is worth around £800k. There's just one problem, as Ms Lowe explains: 'I don't want to move, that's the bottom line. I love this house. My children were three and five when we arrived so they really can't remember anything else. 'Obviously I could downsize, but that doesn't keep the house in the family. It would be very nice to achieve my objective of giving my children some money and giving myself some money without having to lose my home.' Ms Lowe's decision to give money to her sons is twofold: She wants to limit the burden of inheritance tax for her children and also wants the choice of giving money to her sons when she thinks they would benefit most, rather than after she dies. She says: 'I want to make sure they have money at a time of their life when it is of most use. I think usually when you get it [through inheritance], you are past the great point of needing it.' But Ms Lowe is wary of using equity release – a means by which homeowners aged 55 and over can access the equity in their homes as tax-free cash while retaining ownership of their property – because of the high interest repayments. She says: 'My mother lived to 97, well that would be 18 years' worth of interest for me. That's a hell of a lot of interest and it would completely outweigh the benefits of having given some money now because they would lose it all at the end.' One creative solution she is keen to explore is whether her sons could purchase a part of or the entire property via a limited company, after which she could then pay them rent to cover the mortgage repayments. Doug Brodie, financial planner and chief executive, Chancery Lane Ms Lowe is sitting on a goldmine owning a home worth £800k that is mortgage-free. Although she is concerned about compound interest, today's equity release products are not what they once were. Lifetime mortgages now include drawdown facilities, voluntary repayments, fixed interest rates and inheritance protection guarantees. Modern plans offer flexibility and control, allowing people to downsize their equity, not their home. A retirement interest-only (RIO) mortgage could be ideal. Ms Lowe would borrow the lump sum she needs and make interest-only repayments, with no compound build-up. Assuming a 5-6pc interest rate on a £250,000 loan, monthly repayments would be £1,040- £1,250 – well within her pension income. The capital would only be repaid when she enters care or dies, i.e. when the house is sold. Ms Lowe's own solution to let her sons buy the home through a limited company is a creative idea but it's overthinking the options. Often people take technical solutions and try to apply them to their personal positions without realising that those solutions are designed either for commercial operators or families with multi-million amounts of dormant assets. The legal and tax complexities will definitely outweigh the benefits here. With seven bedrooms, Ms Lowe could consider taking in a lodger through the rent-a-room scheme. This would mean a tax-free income up to £7,500 per year, minimal disruption and it could provide a steady gift to her sons. While not a solution for unlocking a lump sum, it could supplement her pension and boost savings – with seven bedrooms there might also be an option for Airbnb lettings. The best solution will simply be to stay away from complex products and costly over-engineered solutions. A competent equity release broker can remove anxiety in that area, and simple cash agreements with the sons will solve the rest of the quandaries. Nick Mendes, mortgage technical manager; John Charcol; and Nick Sutton, sales director, Retirement Solutions Ms Lowe's concerns around equity release are completely valid, particularly when it comes to the potential for interest to compound over time. If Ms Lowe were to borrow £250,000 against her £800,000 home, the current best rate available as of today is a 6.4pc monthly equivalent rate (MER), or 6.59pc annual equivalent rate (AER). If she chose not to make any repayments, the balance after 15 years would grow to approximately £651,261. This gives her the cash now without the need for monthly payments but does of course mean a significant reduction in the value of the estate left behind. There are ways to mitigate that compounding interest. If Ms Lowe feels able to cover the interest payments each month, there are products offering discounted rates while those payments are being maintained. The best currently available sits at 6.23pc MER or 6.41pc AER, which would equate to monthly payments of £1,298 to cover the interest. This would prevent the debt from growing over time, protecting the remaining equity. Depending on whether Ms Lowe wanted the full £250k immediately, a drawdown facility could make a great deal of sense. She could, for instance, take £150k to give as an initial gift to her sons, and retain a further £100k as a pre-agreed reserve to access later if needed, perhaps for future care costs. Ms Lowe's idea for her sons to purchase the property via a limited company is innovative but it presents several practical and financial hurdles. Company mortgages, sometimes referred to as limited company buy-to-let mortgages, attract higher rates and fees than standard residential products. Lenders often require larger deposits, and the fact that one son lives in Germany and both already hold mortgages complicates matters further. Given the tenant is a family member, the lender will consider this as a regulated deal – which will narrow the options. There are tax implications too. Selling her own home to her sons would trigger stamp duty, including the 3pc second property surcharge, and potentially capital gains tax further down the line. Additionally, Ms Lowe would lose her principal private residence relief, meaning any future sale of the property by the company would be liable for corporation tax on any gains. She'd also be paying rent to her sons' limited company, and that's income the company has to declare and pay tax on. It might feel like a workaround to unlock funds, but realistically it's unlikely to be more cost-effective or administratively straightforward than an equity release or retirement interest-only mortgage.
Telegraph
23 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Women who believe in ‘white male privilege' protected from discrimination
Women who believe in ' white male privilege ' are protected from discrimination under equality laws, a judge has ruled. Believing in the notion that white men have an 'unseen advantage' because of their gender and race is a legally protected belief, akin to veganism or gender-critical feminism. The ruling comes in the case of self-proclaimed feminist Misti Kilburn, a senior HR manager suing a global manufacturing company for belief and sex discrimination. Ms Kilburn stopped working for the company in November 2023 and began proceedings in February the following year. She is claiming for discrimination, as well as unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal and victimisation. A genuine belief system The tribunal found that Ms Kilburn's views on white male privilege amounted to a genuine belief system that affords protection under discrimination laws. Employment Judge George Alliott said: 'It was clear to us, and we find, that [Ms Kilburn] does genuinely believe that white middle-aged men have an inherent advantage, in particular in the workplace, and that women remain disadvantaged, in particular in the workplace. 'We accept that many would subscribe to the view that in the workplace white middle-aged men have an advantage and women are disadvantaged.' Judge Alliott also said the court took note of the fact that 'glass ceilings' for women are often referred to in political debate and demonstrated by reference to the under-representation of women on the boards of FTSE 100 companies. He added: 'That said, such views, in our judgment, represent the reflection of, at least, the perceived reality where unfairness in the workplace needs to be acknowledged and addressed by equality in the workplace and the promotion of women's rights. 'It is how [Ms Kilburn] perceives the world.' 'The future is female' The preliminary hearing in Watford was told that Ms Kilburn started working for Sensient Technologies Corporation in July 2014. The business is a global manufacturer and marketer of colourants, flavours and other speciality ingredients. The hearing was told Ms Kilburn held the philosophical belief that 'white middle-aged men have an unseen, unconscious advantage or privilege in many public and private areas of their life by consequence of their gender, age and race'. She also said: 'Women remain disadvantaged in many public and private areas of their life and that factors such as ethnicity and age affect women's experience and the types of disadvantage to which they might be subject'. The panel found that Ms Kilburn promoted equality in both her work and private life and even referred to a gift given to her by a colleague, which read 'the future is female'.
Telegraph
23 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Oil refinery collapsed ‘owing taxman £250m'
One of Britain's biggest oil refineries collapsed owing HMRC hundreds of millions of pounds in unpaid taxes, it can be revealed. The failure of Prax Group, which owned the Lindsey Oil Refinery, threatens the taxpayer with a bill of up to £250m, sources said. Lindsey collapsed earlier this week, blind-siding Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, by declaring insolvency. Officials have been forced to step in to secure the operations of the plant, which supplies 10pc of Britain's fuel. It is understood that Prax was battling severe cash flow problems for more than a year, which left bosses scrambling to extend repayment terms with the tax authority. The company went as far as lobbying for government support last year, according to a source, who said: 'They were trying to get a more generous payment agreement and stretch the time that they had.' However, ministers in the former Tory government refused to intervene. Another source close to the situation said: 'HMRC want their money.' Mr Miliband has ordered an urgent investigation into the 'conduct of directors and the circumstances surrounding its insolvency' following the collapse of Prax, which has owned the Lindsey refinery since 2021. Michael Shanks, the energy minister, said last week that 'there have been longstanding issues with the company', which has racked up tens of millions of pounds of losses in the last four years. Martin Vickers, a Tory MP whose constituency hosts the Lindsey refinery, said: 'I have had concerns surrounding the Prax refinery, particularly in view of the public information about their financial position.' Questions over owners The latest revelations will also raise further questions about the company's owners, Sanjeev and Arani Soosaipillai. The Telegraph revealed earlier this week that they were paid a £3.7m dividend the year before the company's collapse, despite Prax posting $30m worth of losses. Mr Soosaipillai, who is chief executive and chairman of the business, has not commented since the collapse and did not respond to The Telegraph's requests for comment. The Insolvency Service has since taken control of the refinery in Lincolnshire. Concerns over potential disruption to fuel supplies have grown in recent days after deliveries of crude were halted. However, a breakthrough between the Government and Glencore, which supplies the crude, was struck on Friday morning to ensure the plant can keep functioning and fuel can continue to leave the plant. A spokesman for Teneo, which has been appointed as joint administrators, said: 'As is standard practice in all insolvency cases, the joint administrators will be reviewing the circumstances giving rise to their appointment and the cause of failure.' An HMRC spokesman said: 'We are unable to comment on identifiable individuals or businesses due to strict confidentiality rules.' As well as owning the refinery, Prax's $10bn energy empire also includes petrol stations and oil storage sites. The company had been in talks with the Government since April, but repeatedly refused to share details about its financial situation. Mr Soosaipillai also assured officials there was no immediate threat to the refinery, a position that suddenly changed last week as his company rushed to declare insolvency. More than 400 people work at the facility. Mr Shanks told the Commons earlier this week: 'The wealthy owner cannot wash his hands of his obligations to the workers and their families.'
