Force India administrator expects swift action against Uralkali

Force India's administrator, FRP Advisory, has responded to Uralkali's stance to take legal action by stating its bid would not have saved the Silverstone squad from administration.

Uralkali was one of the parties that were interested in purchasing Force India over the summer break after it was forced in administration. However, the team was sold to a consortium of investors led by Canadian businessman Lawrence Stroll, father of Williams driver Lance.

Uralkali accused FRP Advisory of not recognising that their bid was higher, “misrepresentations and lack of transparency” in the process of bidding and “failing to achieve the maximisation of sale proceeds for the benefit of creditors, shareholders and other stakeholders”.

FRP Advisory released a statement on Thursday evening, saying that it had indeed received notice that Uralkali was planning legal action and explained why Racing Point (the current owners of Force India) was the best option to go with.

“We can now confirm that we have been served with a claim from Uralkali relating to the administration of Force India,” the statement read.  “We are disappointed that Uralkali chose to issue their press release before issuing their claim. 

“We have acted in compliance with our duties as administrators at all times and oversaw a fair and transparent bidding process which ultimately achieved a very successful outcome for all stakeholders. Having now seen the substance of Uralkali’s claim we are ever more confident it will be dismissed at the earliest opportunity.

“As all of the interested parties were aware, our primary statutory duty as administrators was to pursue a rescue of Force India as a going concern. All parties had the opportunity to submit a proposal to rescue the company rather than buy its assets.  

“When the final offers came in, Racing Point was the only party to submit a rescue proposal.  Once the proposal had been carefully assessed and we, alongside our legal advisors, were satisfied that it was reasonably achievable, we were under a statutory duty to proceed with it. 

“Having failed to submit a proposal to rescue the company Uralkali now insists on comparing its bid to buy the assets of the company with a rival bid to rescue the company or buy the assets should that fail.”