Enzo Homes entered compulsory liquidation in March 2025. The company based in Cross Hands has appointed Stephen Goderski and Oliver Collinge of PKF Littlejohn Advisory as joint liquidators to oversee the process. Since it is still early days, the  liquidators are analysing finances and will confirm how much creditors are owed in time. They are also working on assessing what potential returns could be achieved through the sale of the company’s assets.

The business was founded by Fiorenzo Sauro, who remains involved in other ventures. Enzo’s Homes had been trading for nearly 13 years, delivering a range of residential schemes across Wales and parts of England. Its most recent accounts, filed for the financial year ending March 2024, reported net assets of £1.6 million. 

As part of the administration process, the liquidators are now marketing a four-acre industrial development near Swansea, previously owned by Enzo’s Homes. While the name of the site has not been disclosed, the development is tenanted. Its rental income value has made it a potentially attractive acquisition for investors seeking freehold assets.

Enzo’s Homes and its founder have previously faced controversy. In 2021, the company and Mr. Sauro were fined £300,000 (later reduced to £100,000 on appeal) after a 176-year-old giant redwood tree was mistakenly felled to make way for an 80-home scheme at the Penllergaer Estate in Swansea. In 2021, the company faced further controversy when environmental officers discovered it had polluted a tributary of the River Llwyd with silt during construction work at a site in Abbey Woods, Cwmbran.

The past controversies surrounding the business are likely to have a significant impact on both the company’s reputation and its insolvency proceedings. A poor public image can make it harder for a company to secure new contracts, attract buyers for assets, or negotiate favourable terms with creditors during insolvency.

In the context of liquidation, these controversies may also affect how potential investors or buyers perceive the value of the company’s assets, particularly if any of those assets are tied to developments facing regulatory scrutiny or reputational risk. Furthermore, creditors might view the company’s management and governance as weak or negligent, influencing their willingness to engage constructively in the winding-up process