TPR Post Mortem Dissects Philip Green

Report on deal to fund BHS pension contradicts public statements made by Green.

In a rather blunt report summarizing the negotiations leading up to the deal in which BHS owner Sir Philip Green agreed to fund his defunct company’s pension plan with £363 million ($473 million), the UK’s The Pensions Regulator (TPR) portrays Green as having tried to shirk his responsibilities to his workers.

Under the terms of the settlement, which were agreed upon earlier this year, Green is providing funding for a new independent pension plan, which gives members the option of the same starting pension as they were originally promised by BHS, and higher benefits than they would get from the Pension Protection Fund (PPF).

“The agreement we have reached with Sir Philip Green represents a strong outcome for the members of the BHS pension schemes,” said TPR chief executive Lesley Titcomb said at the time.

But in an analysis of the agreement, TPR revealed that Green made several attempts to settle the dispute that were rejected for being insufficient. It also concluded that the main reason behind the sale of BHS “was to postpone BHS’ insolvency to prevent a liability to the schemes falling due while it was part of the Taveta group of companies ultimately owned by the Green family,” said TPP. It added that “the effect of the sale was materially detrimental to the schemes.”

For more stories like this, sign up for the CIO Alert newsletter.

TPR’s assessment appears to contradict Green’s public apology to BHS pensioners “for this last year of uncertainty, which was clearly never the intention when the business was sold in March 2015.”

The report also disputes what Green said at a parliamentary hearing last year in which MPs grilled him on BHS’ pension problems. Green told the MPs that “somebody was asleep at the wheel,” but that it wasn’t him, because he was not involved in he pension negotiations.  However, in its report, TPR said Green was “personally involved with the schemes, including investment issues, the 2012 valuation and recovery plan negotiations, and the appointment of new trustees and advisers.” TPR also referred to him as a key decision maker.

“The report highlights the lessons we have learned from this case about how we can regulate more effectively,” said Nicola Parish, executive director of frontline regulation. “We are already acting more quickly to intervene where we consider schemes to be underfunded, or where there are indications that employers may be avoiding their responsibilities.”

Tags: , ,

J.P. Morgan Global Alternatives Raises $480 Million

Fund invests in the distressed shipping sector.

J.P. Morgan Asset Management closed its Global Maritime Investment Fund II with $480 million in capital commitments from a variety of international institutional investors, including pension plans, insurance companies, and endowments.

The fund, which easily surpassed its target capital goal of $400 million, is among the largest dedicated shipping funds. It invests in vessels operating in shipping sub-sectors that are experiencing substantial distress, and where values are trading near historical lows, according to J.P. Morgan. The fund has already invested 65% of total capital, or $312 million, through the acquisition of 14 assets.

The distressed shipping opportunity is a small part of a more expansive transportation capital requirement, which has grown following the departure of traditional funding sources such as banks. 

“With an estimated $4.5 trillion-plus in capital required to finance global transportation assets over the next 10 years, this is a large-scale and wide-ranging investment opportunity,” said Anton Pil, managing partner of J.P. Morgan Global Alternatives.

Want the latest institutional investment industry
news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters.

J.P. Morgan Global Alternatives is the alternative investment arm of J.P. Morgan Asset Management, and has more than $120 billion in assets under management.  

However, according to a recent survey from law firm Norton Rose Fulbright, funding for the industry is expected to become increasingly scarce. The survey said bank debt is expected to remain the industry’s primary source of funding, followed by private equity and shareholders.

“Looking ahead to the next five years, just 22% believe that the availability of funds will increase, while 41% fear that funding will become more unobtainable,” said the survey. “In addition, respondents from the shipping industry are expecting lenders to take a tougher stance on problem loans, with 54% anticipating that enforcement actions will increase between now and 2022.”

Global political uncertainty, a global recession, and protectionism are the greatest threats to the shipping industry over the next five years, according to 28%, 25%, and 22% of those polled, respectively. At the same time, however, the survey also found confidence in the shipping industry appears to be improving, as 37% of respondents said that current market conditions are positive for the shipping industry, compared with 15% in 2016.

Tags: , ,

«