Less than half of their revenue came from UK government, albeit UK government was their largest customer with close to half.

The main problems were poor management of liquidity and their pension deficit. The company was profitable and increasing dividends year on year and paying large bonuses to execs. It was mismanagement and overreaching. They were still booking profits. It is arguable that the accounting wasn't fit for purpose, but their is little evidence that contracts from the UK government weren't profitable for Carillion.

The deals with Carillion were still bad for the taxpayer and should never have been made in the first place.

[Link]

Seems that the directors paid top money and bonus payments to while neglecting to top up the pension pot, i think the shareholders did ok to, the con government should look to take back the money if they have any balls, make the directors sell there houses if need be, better that than a trip at her majestys pleasure as someone should be held accountable,,,and not the taxpayer!

You don't seem to understand what a limited company is.

The shareholders who lost all of their investment did okay did they?

And it won't be the taxpayer, it'll be the PPF whose finances are raised via a levy on pension funds and via investments of that.

Although i agree with your post there is the point that historic dividends were paid while a known large deficit existed in the pension fund.

It's a problem with how ratings companies value companies.

It was the emotive "make the directors sell their houses" nonsense that made me reply.

Change the law to ringfence the pensions. Or ban defined benefit schemes altogether.

It was the emotive "make the directors sell their houses" nonsense that made me reply.

Change the law to ringfence the pensions. Or ban defined benefit schemes altogether.