The Torsion Construction collapse creditors (owed a combined £20m in unsecured debt) are expected to recover nothing, according to a report filed on Companies House by administrators at Interpath. The Leeds-headquartered student accommodation and build-to-rent contractor went under in July 2026 after a period of rapid growth that ultimately exposed it to the sector-wide pressures of rising costs and thinning margins.
From rapid growth to administration
The scale of Torsion Construction’s expansion in its final years was considerable. Turnover grew from £57m in the year to 30 June 2023 to £165.4m in the year to 30 June 2025, a trajectory that brought the company to 115 employees by the time of its collapse. That growth, however, masked a deteriorating financial position.
According to figures reported by Construction Enquirer, during its 2026 trading period the firm recorded losses of £847,000 from a turnover of £78m. That is a sharp reversal from the pre-tax profit of £497,000 it generated from a £165m turnover in 2025. The contraction in revenue alongside the slide into loss illustrates how quickly conditions deteriorated once margin pressure took hold. The report filed by administrators identified rising costs and a slowing market as conditions affecting the wider construction sector, and noted that several of Torsion Construction’s specific sites experienced construction issues that created overspend and delays, compounding an already fragile financial position.
With margins thin from the outset and losses accumulating through its 2026 financial year, the company began drawing down on its cash reserves. Directors introduced direct payment arrangements between development funders and subcontractors on certain projects to keep work moving, but the administrators’ report noted that this approach further reduced Torsion Construction’s own working capital.
Torsion Construction collapse creditors and the funding breakdown
Directors told administrators they sought new funding as the position worsened, but HSBC withdrew its lending to the company in early 2026. A subsequent facility arranged through Bibby Financial Services, structured as an invoice discounting arrangement, provided a temporary bridge. In May 2026, Bibby withdrew that agreement too. By July, directors estimated the business would need to raise £6m to continue trading. Unable to secure that sum, they appointed Interpath as administrators.
James Clark and Howard Smith of Interpath were appointed as Joint Administrators of Torsion Construction Limited on 29 July 2026, according to Interpath. Bibby Financial Services is owed around £1m, and at least some recovery is anticipated. HMRC is owed £1.4m, though the administrators have not confirmed how much of that sum is expected to be recouped. An outstanding director’s loan account of £41,250 is also on record.
On the assets side, around £15.7m is owed to the business by other related companies. The administrators are pursuing those intercompany balances, though the quantum recoverable remains uncertain.
Subcontractor exposure and the wider Torsion group
The unsecured creditor total of £20m includes £15.7m owed to trade creditors, the overwhelming majority of which represents exposure held by subcontractors and suppliers. Construction Enquirer reported that hundreds of suppliers were owed at least £15.6m at the point of administration. The administrators do not expect any recovery for unsecured creditors, a position that will weigh heavily on the supply chain firms that supported Torsion Construction’s project pipeline.
Not all entities within the broader Torsion group entered administration at the same time. Torsion Care, Torsion Projects, Torsion Homes and Torsion Developments were initially unaffected when the construction business collapsed. Torsion Developments, which had been the main client to Torsion Construction, subsequently entered receivership on 8 September 2026, adding further complexity to the group’s unwind and to the prospects for any recovery across the creditor pool.
The administrators’ report attributes the failure to a combination of sector-wide conditions and site-specific difficulties. For the subcontractors now facing write-offs, the distinction between macro headwinds and project-level overspend will matter little: the consolidated shortfall is £20m, and the expectation is that none of it will be returned.
