DUKES HOTEL LIMITED

• ⚠

  Material uncertainty over going concern

  As stated in note 1.2 of the financial statements, the hotel temporarily closed post year end to allow for an extensive refurbishment project, which is being funded through a banking facility and the ultimate shareholder. The directors state that they have a reasonable expectation that the company has adequate resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future. The validity of this assumption is on the basis that the company will continue to be supported by its ultimate shareholder. We were unable to satisfy ourselves that the ultimate shareholder can provide such support to the company. Consequently we were unable to determine whether the company has sufficient resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future.

• ◆

  Audit opinion: Qualified

  Latest auditor's report carried a non-clean opinion.

1. DUKES HOTEL LIMITED 1995-12-22 → present
2. DUKES HOTEL HOLDINGS LIMITED 1989-03-10 → 1995-12-22
3. ARTHUR RAPP LIMITED 1980-12-31 → 1989-03-10
4. ROANBEECH LIMITED 1979-11-15 → 1980-12-31

Values shown as filed in the company's annual accounts. — indicates the figure wasn't present under that line item in that period. About these numbers

Margins divide P&L lines by turnover. Gearing is liabilities over total assets. Current ratio is current assets over creditors falling due within one year. Interest cover is operating profit over absolute finance costs. Sector-distribution context coming next.

Accounting basis

FRS 102

Reporting scope

Standalone (parent only)

Auditor

HW Fisher Audit

Audit opinion

Qualified

Going concern

Material uncertainty disclosed

“As stated in note 1.2 of the financial statements, the hotel temporarily closed post year end to allow for an extensive refurbishment project, which is being funded through a banking facility and the ultimate shareholder. The directors state that they have a reasonable expectation that the company has adequate resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future. The validity of this assumption is on the basis that the company will continue to be supported by its ultimate shareholder. We were unable to satisfy ourselves that the ultimate shareholder can provide such support to the company. Consequently we were unable to determine whether the company has sufficient resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future.”

Significant events

• “On 6 January 2025, the hotel temporarily closed to allow for an extensive refurbishment project, with anticipated re-opening not expected until Summer of 2026.”
• “The total redundancy costs were £142,785.”
• “On 6 May 2025, the company entered into a loan agreement. Facility A is available for amounts of £24,000,000 in order to refinance loans held in the parent company as at 31 December 2024. Facility B is available for £17,000,000 in order to fund the refurbishment project at the hotel.”

Auditor, going-concern and subsidiary information is drawn from the narrative of the latest annual accounts. About these numbers

Filings

8

last 12 months

Capital events

0

last 24 months

Officers appointed

1

last 12 months

Officers resigned

0

last 12 months

Direct counts from the register. No score, no rating — see the Filing timeline for the underlying events.

• Turnover

  -18.3%

  £11,617,410 → £9,488,553

• Cash

  +218.9%

  £1,114,845 → £3,554,902

• Net assets

  +100.3%

  £1,498,108 → £3,000,865

• Employees

  +3.9%

  102 → 106

• Operating profit

  -19.2%

  £3,010,744 → £2,433,379

• Profit before tax

  -14.7%

  £1,899,641 → £1,619,641

• Wages

  -16.9%

  £3,401,646 → £2,827,230

Each % is (latest − prior) ÷ |prior| for the line item as filed. Periods don't have to be exactly 12 months apart — a long or short period (typical around incorporation or year-end changes) will distort the comparison. Lines a company doesn't report are omitted. About these numbers