Big Difference Company creditors' meeting: what the trustees told us
The Live Comedy Association attended the creditors' meeting for Big Difference Company, the charity behind Leicester Comedy Festival, on 3 September 2026. We submitted a list of questions in advance and were able to put most of them to the trustees. Below is our record of what was said.
Around 15 people attended the meeting in person, with a further 20 joining online. Five trustees took part: Robbie Kerr, Laura Hailstone and Emma Anderson in person, and Chair of Trustees Christine Traill and Kevin Schurer online.
At the end of the meeting, creditors voted to establish a creditors' committee, and the LCA will have representation on it. Creditors also appointed FRP as liquidators.
Full list of questions here, only answered ones appear below.
Staffing and delivery of the festival
2. Given the staffing structure didn't include a producer or festival director, which role took responsibility for delivering the annual festivals? Statements were made in spring 2026 about planning for the next festival — if any post was vacant from 1 April, how did you intend to produce Leicester Comedy Festival 2027?
The trustees explained that they were planning to recruit temporary staff later this year to produce and work on Leicester Comedy Festival 2027.
The trustees' report
3. The report makes no mention of the national significance of Leicester Comedy Festival. Is this an oversight?
The trustees explained that their report is a summary and that not everything has been included.
4. The report makes no mention of the UK Kids' Comedy Festival. Has that been erased from your collective memory?
The trustees again explained that their report is a summary and that not everything has been included.
11. The report implies there was "maintained communications" with the Live Comedy Association. Our records show one meeting, on 12 June 2026, with the CEO and the then Chair of Trustees. Following that meeting, Big Difference emailed asking LCA directors to personally act as guarantors for a loan the charity was trying to secure. This request was declined. We would be grateful for the report to be amended so the level of communication is clearer.
The LCA made a formal request at the meeting for the trustees' report to be amended in light of this, and to make clear the extent of communication between Big Difference Company and the LCA.
Costs, sponsorship and funding
5. What were the technology and digital infrastructure costs, and what were these spent on? (We asked this in response to a statement in the trustees' report that "costs of operating the company increased substantially, including technology and digital infrastructure costs".)
The trustees explained that these costs included hosting the website, server costs for the office and other expenditure.
6. Who led on attempts to secure additional sponsorship income, and what did this work involve?
The trustees explained that this was the work of the senior staff.
7. What was the largest pitch, in financial terms, that you presented to a company for potential sponsorship over the last three years?
The trustees explained that they did not know the answer, as the work was carried out by the senior staff.
8. What was the largest application, in financial terms, that you made to an external source of potential funding or income over the last three years?
The trustees again explained that they did not know the answer, as the work was carried out by the senior staff.
10. The audited accounts of 29 June 2024 refer to the reserves policy not being met and to changes required to ensure the charity's long-term sustainability. The report also states that you considered options more recently for long-term sustainability. What were these options, and when were they considered?
The trustees explained that they constantly reviewed costs and expenditure, including items such as office accommodation and related costs.
Economic impact assessment
9. Is the economic impact assessment you produced publicly available, and what were its key findings?
The trustees said the report is still in draft form and is not publicly available.
Communication with comedians, promoters and venues
12. We estimate approximately £70,000 was received from comedians, promoters and venues in registration fees for Leicester Comedy Festival 2026, the majority of it in early October 2025 — presumably one of the largest single sources of income, larger than the funding received from Leicester City Council. There is no mention of this income in the report. Why weren't these stakeholders communicated with when it became clear the financial situation was challenging?
The trustees replied that comedians and promoters had been communicated with, and that emails had been sent throughout the period from February onwards. No comment was made on the fact that no emails or other communications had been sent since the end of May.
13. Trustees presumably knew the financial situation was challenging in autumn 2025, when payments to acts and promoters from Leicester Comedy Festival 2025 were significantly delayed. Did trustees know, and was it recorded at a board meeting, that a guarantee was made in autumn 2025 that ticket income would be ringfenced in 2026 to prevent the same situation happening again?
The trustees said they did not know that people had been told in autumn 2025 that ticket money would be ringfenced.
15. At the end of May, people received an email stating that "your payment will be completed by no later than August. This is our worst case scenario and will be doing all we can to ensure that we are well ahead of this deadline." It went on to say: "We recognise the need for significant review to restore community faith in the festival, which is ongoing whilst we complete the settlement process." This was the last email sent to comedians and promoters before they read the news in the media. Does this reflect what the report states about keeping people informed as the situation evolved?
The trustees said they had done everything they could, and had worked incredibly hard, to find and secure income over the preceding months. This included a £50,000 loan from NatWest and a request to Leicester City Council for additional funding. There was no direct response to the question about keeping people informed.
Ticket income
14. Ticket money from 2026 was due to be paid on 19 April, a date communicated to comedians and promoters in advance of the festival. On 17 April an email was sent saying payments would not be made. At what point did trustees know payments couldn't be made, and does this reflect the robust scrutiny and challenge of financial forecasts described in the report?
The trustees stated that they did not know payments would not be made, and that the first they knew of it was when they read about it on the comedy website Chortle.
19. Statements from trustees so far, reinforced by the report, suggest that comedians and promoters "have not been paid" following Leicester Comedy Festival 2026. What actually happened is that Big Difference acted as a ticket agency and held money in trust belonging to third parties, which it was due to pass on to those third parties on 19 April. These two things are not the same. At what point did trustees authorise Big Difference spending ticket money collected on behalf of other people?
The trustees said they did not authorise the spending of ticket money on operational costs, and rejected the suggestion that they acted as a ticket agency on behalf of comedians, promoters and venues taking part in Leicester Comedy Festival.
Questions we were not able to ask
Time did not allow for all of our questions to be put to the trustees. The following were submitted in advance but were not asked at the meeting. We will continue to press for answers.
The directors' report states that trustees remain proud of what was achieved. What specific thing is each trustee particularly proud of?
What changed between the end of May, when you communicated that payments would be made by the end of August, and 14 July, when trustees met with liquidators FRP?
Why has there been no direct communication with comedians and promoters since the end of May?
What reductions were seen in income generated from charitable and fundraising activities?
Statements have been made that ticket money was spent on the basis that other income streams had been delayed and were due to be received, described by representatives of Big Difference as sponsorship, funding and earned income. How much was expected, where from, and in hindsight was this an unfortunate statement to have made?
Some people were paid following the 2026 festival. How did you decide who received payment?
We have also sent these notes to the trustees who attended and answered our questions, so they have the opportunity to add to or correct our record. If we receive written responses or updates, we will publish them as soon as possible. In the meantime, we wanted to share the responses that were given.