“Ltd” Without the Ledger: A Financial Reality Check on Wellbeing International Foundation Ltd
When we run the maths against their own claims, the figures raise even more questions.
The UK façade vs. the Bermuda reality
The company styles itself with “Ltd” (Limited), a form most UK readers associate with Companies House filings, audited accounts, and annual returns.
But Wellbeing International Foundation Ltd is not registered with UK Companies House. Instead, the address listed across its websites is Williams House, 20 Reid Street, Hamilton, Bermuda — an offshore jurisdiction known for tax secrecy.
In the UK, even the smallest “Ltd” firms must file basic accounts. By contrast, Bermuda companies face minimal public disclosure requirements, meaning patients and regulators cannot verify turnover, solvency, or liabilities.
The revenue problem: claims vs. filings
Let’s examine their own marketing numbers:
Treatment cost: reported by patients and promotional material as £20,000–£30,000 per person.
Client volume: they claim “hundreds of satisfied customers.” Even if we take the low end — 100 patients at £20,000 each — that equals £2 million in revenue.
Scale that to the high end (e.g., 300 patients at £30,000) and you reach £9 million in potential turnover.
💡 Yet there is no trace of these millions in any public filings.
No Companies House record in the UK.
No net worth or accounts accessible through standard business information providers.
No independent audit trail confirming the financial existence of a decade-old multimillion-pound enterprise.
Why this matters
Consumer trust: High-ticket medical services demand transparency. UK and EU patients expect audited accounts, visible directors, and solvency checks.
Regulatory oversight: UK regulators cannot scrutinise the company’s financial stability because it is registered offshore. If something goes wrong, patients may struggle to seek redress.
Mismatch of branding and reality: Styling itself as a UK-style “Ltd” while sheltering in Bermuda may mislead potential patients into assuming compliance with stricter UK law.
Ten years with no trace?
The websites and promotional copy state the organisation has been operating for over a decade. A legitimate company of that age, with revenues in the millions, would normally leave a footprint:
Historical filings
News reports in business registers
Credit ratings or Dun & Bradstreet entries
Basic net worth indicators
Yet a sweep of public databases reveals nothing of the sort.
The bottom line
When a company:
charges £20,000–£30,000 per patient,
claims hundreds of successful cases,
but leaves no financial trace after 10 years of supposed operation,
the conclusion is unavoidable: the numbers don’t add up.
For prospective patients, this is not just a financial curiosity — it is a critical red flag. Before handing over life savings for unproven treatments, patients should demand corporate transparency, audited accounts, and regulatory proof of legitimacy.
Key findings...
The organisation’s own websites list a Bermuda address (Williams House, 20 Reid Street, Hamilton HM11) — not the UK. Wellbeing International Foundation+2Wellbeing International+2
UK Companies House is where UK “Ltd” firms file public accounts; searching there does not return a company called “Wellbeing International Foundation Ltd.” (There is a different UK company, Wellbeing International R&D Limited, which is not the same entity.) GOV.UK+2GOV.UK+2
Bermuda’s registry requires a login/fee and generally offers limited public financial disclosure compared to the UK, so patients cannot review audited accounts or net worth figures online. Appleby+3gov.bm+3registrarofcompanies.gov.bm+3
1) Where is this company actually based?
Across its sites (including its “testimonials” microsite), the company lists:
Williams House, 20 Reid Street, Hamilton HM11, Bermuda — confirming an offshore base while marketing to UK/EU readers. Wellbeing International Foundation+1
Why this matters: UK-style “Ltd” branding primes readers to expect UK oversight and public accounts. In reality, UK “Ltd”s must file accounts at Companies House (free to search), but this organisation is not listed there under the name it markets, so no UK accounts exist to inspect. GOV.UK+1
Note: A separate UK entity called WELLBEING INTERNATIONAL R&D LIMITED does exist and files micro-accounts. It is not the same as “Wellbeing International Foundation Ltd” marketing out of Bermuda. Don’t conflate them. Companies House
2) Public filings: UK vs Bermuda
UK Companies House: central, free database; even micro-entities file abbreviated accounts. GOV.UK+1
Bermuda: you can search the Registrar, but full details require login/fees and the regime does not publish UK-style profit/loss accounts to the public. Law-firm guidance confirms that Bermuda offers far less public financial transparency (typical offshore model). Appleby+3gov.bm+3registrarofcompanies.gov.bm+3
Bottom line: For a would-be patient evaluating risk, there’s no public audited trail to validate multi-year trading, solvency, or liabilities.
3) The money math (illustrative, based on the company’s own scale claims)
Their marketing and testimonials talk about “hundreds of successful clients.” Wellbeing International+1
If we stress-test even conservative scenarios that are commonly discussed for these types of therapies:
Scenario A (low): 100 clients × £20,000 = £2,000,000 gross receipts
Scenario B (mid): 200 clients × £25,000 = £5,000,000
Scenario C (high): 300 clients × £30,000 = £9,000,000
These are illustrative calculations to gauge scale if the claims of “hundreds” are true and pricing is in the £20k–£30kband often cited for high-ticket regenerative/exosome offerings. Even the low-end scenario implies multi-millionturnover.
Crucial point: For a business trumpeting a 10-year operating history and volumes on the order of hundreds of patients, one would normally expect a verifiable paper trail (accounts, media in business registers, credit reports). Instead, there’s no UK filing for this named entity and Bermuda provides no public accounts to reconcile the story. GOV.UK+2GOV.UK+2
4) Why the opacity is a red flag for patients
Financial resilience & redress: Without public accounts, you can’t judge solvency if there’s a dispute/refund or an adverse event.
Jurisdictional complexity: Offshore entities complicate enforcement and consumer protection.
Marketing vs. evidence: The spend is framed via testimonials, not audited financials or regulator-approved products. (Their own pages centre testimonials and a Bermuda contact.) Wellbeing International+2Wellbeing International Foundation+2
Comments
Post a Comment