Expert Q&A: Iceni’s James Bompas on managing distressed construction projects
27 January 2026
In this Q&A, James Bompas, director at Iceni Projects, explains the challenges involved with distressed construction projects and offers practical advice for insolvency practitioners.
Q. What role does planning play in distressed construction projects?
A. While the circumstances of distressed construction projects vary significantly in scale, geography and complexity, planning issues frequently lie at the heart of their difficulties. Commonly, the timeline required to secure planning permission is significantly underestimated. This underestimation is often the result of overlooking the time needed to negotiate Section 106 agreements or discharge planning conditions. Even straightforward applications typically take a full year from inception to completion, highlighting why planning reform is top of the government’s policy agenda.
Q. How do you typically approach a distressed project?
A. My approach involves quickly establishing a clear understanding of the site's planning status. I ask whether the site has planning permission, or is it caught up in legal negotiations over agreements such as Section 106 agreements? Additionally, I seek clarity about the original consultant team's status, including payment. This information helps me to gauge whether the consultant is likely to be willing to reengage or continue support. Understanding the local planning authority’s awareness and stance on the site's financial position also helps to shape subsequent strategic decisions.
Q. Which considerations arise with portfolios?
A. Rapid and robust due diligence is paramount in scenarios involving portfolios. It is vital to swiftly assess each site's viability and promptly identify any unviable assets, taking a dispassionate, policy-driven approach. I apply a mental stress test to these assets, considering whether each scheme would succeed if subjected to a planning appeal. This method helps to determine whether pursuing the project is a prudent investment of resources.
Q. What are your recommendations for insolvency practitioners?
A. A critical recommendation for receivers or practitioners managing distressed developments is to focus on realising and protecting existing value rather than striving for an idealised outcome. Many distressed properties hold time-limited permissions that, without timely action, risk lapsing and eroding any potential value. I've witnessed numerous debates over achieving "perfect" planning permissions that have ultimately resulted in permissions expiring, leaving receivers with diminished or zero residual value. To mitigate against this risk, precedence should be given to implementing the existing permission or at least securing its formal acknowledgment in local planning policy.
Taking proactive steps to implement existing planning permissions or embed them within local planning frameworks establishes valuable leverage for insolvency practitioners. This leverage is particularly beneficial during subsequent discussions with local planning authorities, when amendments or variations become necessary. Successful navigation of amendments typically involves clearly articulating a well-rehearsed, deliverable narrative. Presenting focused proposals is a more effective strategy than attempting to satisfy all interests simultaneously. The key is communicating a clear and committed pathway to delivery.
Q. What is the secret to realising value in distressed property scenarios?
A. While distressed property and planning applications present unique challenges, successful navigation heavily relies on thorough, early-stage assessments, realistic timelines, decisive action to safeguard value and strategic communication with stakeholders. Adopting a disciplined, pragmatic approach significantly enhances the prospects of recovery and realisation of value in distressed scenarios.
