Latest M&J Group News
CMA updates, filings, public contract awards and credible press coverage.
Last verified: 5 October 2026
Evidence-Concealment Penalties
- CMA Decisions
- Issued
- Company Penalty
- £25,000
- Pirrie Penalty
- £20,000
- Woods Penalty
- £5,000
Bid-Rigging Investigation
- Status
- Open
- Statement of Objections
- Verify current status
- Final Decision
- None as of last update
- Last Verified
- 5 October 2026
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION
The penalties described on this website concern failures to comply with CMA investigative requirements during an inspection.
The separate CMA investigation into suspected bid-rigging remains ongoing.
The CMA has expressly stated that no assumption should currently be made that competition law has been infringed.
This newsroom tracks ongoing developments in the M&J Group CMA case: penalty updates, statements of objections if issued, appeals, final decisions, Companies House filings, public contract awards and credible press coverage.
Current Status
Evidence-Concealment Penalties
- CMA Decisions
- Issued
- Company Penalty
- £25,000
- Pirrie Penalty
- £20,000
- Woods Penalty
- £5,000
Bid-Rigging Investigation
- Status
- Open
- Statement of Objections
- Verify current status
- Final Decision
- None as of last update
- Last Verified
- 5 October 2026
Recent Updates
Underlying investigation remains open
The CMA has stated that no assumption should be made that competition law has been infringed.
Penalties publicly announced
The CMA publicly announces the £50,000 in combined penalties.
Penalty decisions issued
The CMA issues final administrative penalty decisions against M&J Group, Barry Pirrie and Tracey Woods.
M&J publicly named
M&J Group is publicly named among the companies under CMA investigation.
Investigation continues
The underlying competition investigation remains ongoing.
Items returned
The phone and paperwork were returned later the same day and subsequently handed to the CMA.
Pirrie statement on work phone
The CMA found that Estimating Director Barry Pirrie told investigators he did not have a work mobile phone, a statement the CMA found to be false.
Work phone and paperwork removed
According to the CMA, a work mobile phone and paperwork were removed from the premises so that investigators would not find them.
Warranted inspection of M&J premises
CMA investigators execute a warrant at M&J Group's premises in Bedford.
CMA launches investigation
The CMA opens an investigation into suspected anti-competitive conduct in the supply of roofing and other construction services.
What Happens Next
The architecture of this publication supports all potential CMA outcomes: investigation closed without action, statement of objections, parties removed, infringement decision, no-infringement decision, settlement, fines, appeals and court review. No assumption is made about which outcome will occur.