Erith Group is a British construction and civil engineering group specializing in site preparation, demolition, remediation, and infrastructure services. Founded in 1967 and headquartered in Erith, London, the group operates through multiple subsidiary companies providing comprehensive enabling works, plant services, waste management, and haulage across major UK infrastructure and commercial projects.
The group's principal operating company, Erith Contractors Limited, was fined ã17.6 million in 2023 by the UK Competition and Markets Authority for participating in bid-rigging activities in the demolition sector.
Erith Group traces its origins to 1967, when Tom Darsey founded a single-vehicle haulage business in Erith, London. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the business expanded from local haulage into demolition and civil engineering services, gradually developing the multi-company structure that forms today's Erith Group.
In 2017, the Darsey family transferred ownership of the entire Erith Group into an Employee Ownership Trust. Under this structure, qualifying employees across all group companies receive annual bonuses and dividends, and the business is managed for the collective benefit of its workforce. The EOT model has been maintained as the group has continued to expand its operations and subsidiary companies.
Erith Contractors Limited is the principal operating company within Erith Group and its largest subsidiary. The company was formally incorporated as Erith Demolition and Construction Co. Limited on 15 March 1973, changing its name to Erith Contractors Limited in 1987.
Erith Contractors specializes in demolition, asbestos removal, land remediation, and civil engineering works for major infrastructure and commercial development projects across the UK. The company serves as the primary contracting entity for the group's largest and most complex projects.
For the financial year ending 30 September 2024, Erith Contractors reported revenues of ã243.1 million (up 13.8% from ã213.7 million) and pre-tax profits of ã9.0 million (up from ã6.0 million the previous year). The company's balance sheet showed net assets of ã23.6 million and approximately ã27 million in cash reserves.
Erith Plant Services, established in 2014, operates as the group's dedicated plant and equipment division. The company manages the group's fleet of heavy machinery and specialized vehicles, valued at over ã8.5 million, including excavators, crushers, recycling machinery, and heavy transport equipment.
Erith Plant Services provides equipment procurement, maintenance, and management services for projects across the Erith Group, as well as offering plant hire services to external clients. The division ensures the availability and reliability of specialized equipment required for large-scale demolition, earthworks, and civil engineering operations.
In September 2021 a 24âÂÂyearâÂÂold worker, Liam McArdle, was fatally crushed by a demolition grab while working at Erith Plant Services LtdâÂÂs workshop in Eastern Quarry (Swanscombe, Kent). An HSE investigation found Erith Plant Services had âÂÂfailed to ensure there was a safe method of workâ when loading attachments onto excavators, including lack of driver training, poor vehicle/pedestrian segregation, and inadequate supervision. In March 2024 Erith Plant Services Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and was fined ã175,000 (plus ~ã37,800 costs) by Woolwich Crown Court.
In January 2015 two drivers from Erith Haulage Co. Ltd. undertook unscheduled roofâÂÂcleaning work at their yard in Anchor Bay Wharf (Erith, Kent). One driver fell through an unprotected skylight 4.5â¯m to the floor, suffering serious injuries (skull fractures, broken arms, etc.). The HSE prosecuted Erith Haulage for failing to properly plan or supervise work at height. In March 2017 Erith Haulage pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined ã215,000 (plus ~ã10,600 costs).
In 2023 Erith Contractors was implicated in a UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigation of bid-rigging in the demolition and asbestos-removal sector. In March 2023 the CMA fined Erith ã17.6 million for its role in colluding on contract tenders with other firms. (The CMAâÂÂs investigation, which covered five years of contracts in London and the South East, resulted in fines against Erith and several other companies.) Erith did not admit its involvement in the scandal and so did not have its fine reduced. Notably, Erith reported in April 2025 that it had paid off the entire ã17.6m fine ahead of schedule â completing repayment two and a half years earlier than originally planned. The company has stated that it resumed normal operations and returned to profitability following the settlement, and that the early repayment was enabled by a strong trading performance.
In late September 2023 Erith Contractors Ltd (a subsidiary of Erith Group) caused a pollution incident in Cardiff. A demolition crew demolishing a former HMRC building accidentally ruptured a main sewer line, discharging raw sewage into Llanishen Brook and Roath Park Lake. Natural Resources Wales (NRW) investigated after a public report and worked with Erith to contain the spill. In June 2025 NRW announced that Erith Contractors had accepted responsibility and signed an enforcement undertaking. As part of that undertaking, Erith agreed to donate ã150,000 to the South East Wales Rivers Trust to fund river conservation projects in the affected area.
John Doyle Construction Ltd (in liquidation) v Erith Contractors Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1452 is a Court of Appeal case on enforcing adjudication awards against an insolvent company. JDC was a subcontractor on the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park project. JDC went into liquidation and disputed its final account with Erith: JDC claimed about ã4â¯million was due, while Erith said JDC had already been overpaid by about ã3â¯million. After a five-month adjudication, the adjudicator awarded roughly ã1.2â¯million to JDC. Erith challenged enforcement. At first instance (Fraser J, TCC), the court refused summary judgment enforcing the award because JDC had not provided adequate security against ErithâÂÂs counterclaims. JDC appealed.
The Court of Appeal (Coulson LJ, Lewison LJ, Edis LJ) upheld the refusal. Coulson LJ held that a liquidated claimant must show any payment is safely ring-fenced. In particular, any offer of security must be âÂÂclear, evidenced and unequivocalâÂÂ. In Doyle v Erith, the proposed security (an insurance policy and a letter of credit) was held insufficient. The Court emphasized that judges should not be expected to conjure security from vague suggestions; a claimant must make formal, unambiguous undertakings to protect any funds. In short, if a company in liquidation seeks to enforce an adjudication, it must be beyond doubt how the award will be ring-fenced against future claims.
The judgment also (in obiter) dealt with the effect of insolvency set-off. Because an adjudicatorâÂÂs decision is provisional, it cannot finally fix the net balance between mutual claims. Coulson LJ noted that if the paying party has an unresolved counterclaim or set-off, the adjudication award does not determine the true balance of what each owes. On that basis, the Court held an insolvent claimant is generally not entitled to enforcement by summary judgment when a genuine cross-claim remains. Enforcement can only proceed if the net balance can be determined at once â for example, if the cross-claim is undisputed or can itself be decided immediately. Otherwise, the Insolvency Rules (and set-off) prevail, and the liquidated party must pursue its net claim in full litigation.
The immediate outcome was that JDCâÂÂs appeal failed â it neither proved adequate security nor overcame ErithâÂÂs set-off. Coulson LJ remarked that the sort of security needed (essentially an indemnity and a ring-fenced escrow) would make summary enforcement a âÂÂfutile gestureâ for liquidators. Commentators note that the Court effectively reaffirmed a âÂÂfundamental incompatibilityâ between the quick-pay adjudication regime and the insolvency set-off regime. In practice, an insolvent claimant may now have to rely on full court proceedings to recover its net claim, even after âÂÂwinningâ an adjudication.
Erith Contractors has worked on numerous major UK infrastructure and commercial projects, typically providing demolition, site clearance and remediation. Recent examples include:
Other large projects (from ErithâÂÂs project portfolio) have included enabling works on London developments and tunnels, such as early-phase demolitions on the Thames Tideway and Silvertown Tunnel projects, and major building redevelopments in the South East.