More than 40 left redundant as Wolverhampton firm shuts

A building firm in Wolverhampton has shut, with the loss of dozens of jobs.

Forty-one workers have been made redundant with the closure of Coalway Building Services, which was based in All Saints.

Coalway, of Steelhouse Lane, was founded in 1992 and specialised in mechanical and electrical installations to residential, health and education buildings.

Last year it was employing 18 management staff and 80 workers.

But it today emerged that the company went into administration on January 24 and closed four days later when the redundancies of all its 41 remaining workers were made redundant.

The economic downturn has been blamed for its demise.

Ian Gould and Kim Rayment, of BDO in Birmingham, have been appointed as joint administrators of Coalway.

Mr Rayment, BDO’s business restructuring partner, said workers would be able to make a claim for a payout for the loss of their job.

He said: “Unfortunately the economic climate, and a reduction in working capital, significantly affected the business.

“The joint administrators will be assisting all employees with their redundancy claims and we would like to thank them all for their forbearance at this time.”

The company, which has worked with main contractors including Bullock Construction, Wates, Seddon, Thomas Vale and Vinci, was sub-contracted by Cameron Black for the ongoing refurbishment of government offices in London.

Cameron Black also entered administration on January 28 after closing its sites at the start of the month.

Coalway had turnover of £9 million in 2012-2013 and made a pre-tax profit of £67,931.

The company, which started out concentrating on the West Midlands, extended its geographical reach in recent years.

Comments for: "More than 40 left redundant as Wolverhampton firm shuts"

Annie Bro

The construction industry has always been vulnerable to the 'domino effect' of collapsing companies; many many friends of mine's hubbies have suffered in the past:

It works something like this; Company A has the connections to win the big contracts, usually on a 'management basis', they retender for a main contractor ( the one's who's names normally dominate the hoardings, known as Company B),who themselves sub-contract the work to others(companies C) ; what then will usually happen is the larger subcontractors will again use smaller companies themselves( companies D,E etc); why you might ask? To cut their risks via variations or tender error and to rio-off those at the bottom;

Company A may well get paid in full by the client ( usually the taxpayer), but if there is a dispute over variations, they do not lose out from non-payment, they just don't pay those who actually did the work;

This is an honest explanation for not paying; the other one is the companies A,B will deliberately only pay partially their subbbies as they know they can't do bugger all about it in reality; ( court is far too expensive with a 50:50 chance of succeeding);