The latest twist in the saga following the restructure of GoodBox has seen an appeal from administrators Frost Group dismissed by the courts.
Frost Group claims it is owed £170,000 in fees after the ‘tech for good’ FinTech was rescued from administration via a Part 26A Restructuring Plan proposed by NGI Systems, a tech vendor of GoodBox.
Understood to be the first deal of its kind outside of London, the move in January 2023 reportedly saw GoodBox’s debt burden of more than £10m slashed by more than 90%, while it also allowed for the introduction of new angel investors and a new board.
The sanctioned plan saved the £4.5m of taxpayer funds provided to GoodBox in January 2021 via the UK Government Future Fund, a scheme designed to support innovative UK businesses during the pandemic and operated by the British Business Bank on behalf of the Government.
Frost Group opposed the rescue package, having previously had their efforts to sell the business blocked by the courts. It was ordered by the Leeds High Court to fall in line to accept the plan on behalf of the company and also saw a separate application to sell the business dismissed, alongside an order to pay the legal costs of NGI Systems in the matter.
The only substantial creditor voting against the plan was the British Business Bank, even though the alternative of a fire sale of assets would have wiped out all creditors and shareholders of GoodBox.
Since its inception in 2016, GoodBox has supported the charity sector by providing charities with a range of digital fundraising tools and contactless technology.
To date, it has implemented thousands of devices across the UK and raised millions for charities.
Bytes hits £2bn milestone amid double-digit growth under new boss
Following the dismissal of the latest appeal, Frost Group managing director Jeremy Frost said it was “happy to have lost”.
The company stated: “Unfortunately, guidance provided through the Part 26A Scheme and indeed at a lower court proved misleading, requiring Frost Group to seek clarity utilising the leave provided in the lower court to appeal.
“The resulting judgment that Frost Group had made an application under a Rule that did not apply, was not a surprise, particularly as it confirms the true position to be the one Frost Group had been claiming from the beginning, namely that the quantum of their outstanding remuneration should be adjudicated upon under the Part 26A Scheme.”
Jeremy Frost said it would now “proceed as anticipated to reclaim the sums due to us in line with our initial expectation”.
He added: “It is sad that an insolvency procedure meant to end disputes was drafted in such a way as to exacerbate them. It is of course unfortunate that we have had to pursue this course of action to get here, but we are now confident that this will be the end of the litigation.”
Its counsel Eleanor Temple KC and Jonathan Fletcher-Wright stated: “We are delighted that the court has determined the way forward and that the former administrators will obtain that which they have always sought: an assessment of their properly incurred remuneration during their time in office.”