长沙U币代付方式|【唯一TG:@heimifeng8】|电报盗号系统全功能破解技术✨谷歌搜索留痕排名,史上最强SEO技术,20年谷歌SEO经验大佬✨More questions over Body Shop as profitable stores shut, money reportedly 'missing'
Sandra Halliday Published
March 4, 2025
The Body Shop is back in the news this week with administrators reportedly looking into claims of millions of pounds being taken out of the business before its administration filing, as well as talk that multiple stores earmarked for closure were actually profitable in their latest year.
The report about a probe into missing money was published by The Telegraph. It said administrators at FRP are investigating claims of unaccounted-for funds pre-dating completion of the firm’s sale by Natura &Co to private equity group Aurelius. None of the parties concerned have commented.
It also said the company’s UK retail arm posted profits of £19 million on revenues of £163 million ahead of the collapse early this year. Those figures don’t include costs from the global operations, but the entity that was placed into administration last month did include such costs and therefore made a loss of £60 million in the last year for which figures are available (2025).
The Sunday Times also reported that a leak of documents over the weekend “showed that last year just eight of The Body Shop’s 206 stores in the UK were loss-making”.
However, a source close to the matter told City AM that closure decisions were calculated on expected future profitability and those chosen were loss-making in the months leading up to the collapse.
It has all raised questions about the administration process and some MPs are also calling for a deeper review of the company’s failure given the large number of store closures and job losses, with redundancy payments set to be funded by the British taxpayer.
To further complicate matters, Natura and Aurelius are a loggerheads over payments promised to former senior employees.
Awards worth £3 million were included as part of the £207 million sale deal reached late last year. Natura said it was “surprised and concerned” by claims of the payments not being made and said it had funded them “through an agreed reduction in the purchase price of the business”. But the issue has since become wrapped up in the administration filing.