Business

Carbon3.ai, the UK’s leading sovereign AI infrastructure company, has announced a £1 billion investment to build the country’s first nationwide network of fully sovereign, sustainable AI-ready data centres — a move expected to reshape the UK’s digital resilience, national security and long-term competitiveness in artificial intelligence.

The ambitious programme will convert legacy industrial and energy sites into a network of high-performance, low-carbon compute hubs, all designed, owned and operated exclusively within the UK. This ensures that every component — from physical locations to data processing — remains under full UK jurisdiction and regulatory oversight. Carbon3.ai has already completed a successful proof of concept and is preparing for full-scale deployment, with its first 5MW site in the East Midlands opening in March 2026. Planning approval has also been submitted for a second facility in Derbyshire.

To support the next phase of its growth, Carbon3.ai has strengthened its leadership with appointments spanning government, finance and national security. Sana Khareghani, former Head of the UK Government Office for Artificial Intelligence, joins as Chief Strategy Officer, where she will spearhead the development of the national AI infrastructure strategy and ensure the company’s network underpins the UK’s digital, industrial and energy transition.

Khareghani will be supported by Richard Collier-Keywood, the former Vice Chair of PwC’s Global Board, who will advise on financial strategy and governance, and Admiral Sir George Zambellas, former First Sea Lord, whose experience in national resilience and major-scale technology operations will guide Carbon3.ai’s approach to infrastructure security.

Together, the new leadership team brings what Carbon3.ai describes as a “rare combination” of strategic, operational and national service expertise — positioning the company at the centre of the UK’s race to secure sovereign compute capacity.

“If the UK is to lead in AI, we must first secure the foundations: compute, power and data,” said Khareghani. “Carbon3 is building those foundations here at home, transforming legacy energy sites into a sovereign, renewable, AI-ready infrastructure network. This isn’t theory — it’s happening now on the ground. By putting critical infrastructure back under UK control, we are creating the sustainable capacity that will power innovation for decades.”

Carbon3.ai chief executive Tom Humphreys said the investment reflects the UK’s urgent need for sovereign AI infrastructure: “It’s not enough to invest in data centres — we need a national backbone for AI that’s owned, powered and secured right here at home,” he said. “Our goal is to ensure British enterprise, researchers and public institutions have access to world-class compute without relying on foreign-controlled infrastructure.”

Humphreys added that the company is building from “real assets, land, power and live deployments”, and noted that government acknowledges the scale of the challenge. “They’ve been clear that we need 6GW of sovereign AI capacity by 2030. We believe this network will be pivotal in securing that national advantage.”

The investment aligns closely with the UK Government’s AI and digital infrastructure agenda, supporting national resilience, regional regeneration and the conversion of brownfield and legacy energy sites into clean, renewable-powered compute hubs. Carbon3.ai’s expansion also dovetails with plans for AI Growth Zones and the classification of new data centre capacity as critical national infrastructure.

Carbon3.ai’s announcement represents one of the most substantial private-sector commitments yet to accelerating the UK’s sovereign AI capabilities — and signals the rapid emergence of a new strategic industry for Britain’s economic future.

Read more:
Carbon3.ai to invest £1bn in UK’s first fully sovereign AI infrastructure network

Customers of UK banks and building societies will soon benefit from a major increase to the amount of money protected if their bank fails, after regulators confirmed that the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) deposit limit will rise from £85,000 to £120,000.

The change, announced by the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), marks the largest uplift since 2017 and reflects updated inflation data and industry feedback. It will take effect in December, with customers automatically covered — no action is required from account holders.

Martyn Beauchamp, chief executive of the FSCS, said the increase will give consumers stronger reassurance at a time of economic uncertainty.

“This rise ensures that consumers can feel confident their money is safe, from the very first penny up to £120,000,” he said.

The FSCS protects deposits per person, per authorised firm, meaning multiple accounts held under the same banking licence share the £120,000 limit. Several major banks operate multiple brands under a single licence — a detail the PRA encourages consumers to check.

Sam Woods, deputy governor for prudential regulation at the Bank of England and CEO of the PRA, said the reform strengthens financial stability and public confidence.

“This change will help maintain the public’s confidence in the safety of their money,” he said. “Depositors will be protected up to £120,000 should their bank, building society or credit union fail.”

Consumer groups welcomed the move. Which? described it as a “sensible decision” that reinforces trust in the financial services sector without restricting economic growth. Rocio Concha, the group’s director of policy and advocacy, said the increase was “a timely reminder that strong consumer protections need not hamper those aims.”

Industry representatives also backed the decision. Eric Leenders, managing director of personal finance at UK Finance, said adjusting the limit for inflation was “right” and that the sector would work with regulators to ensure smooth implementation.

As part of the same update, the PRA confirmed a rise in the temporary high balance cap — which protects large sums resulting from major life events such as house sales, inheritances or insurance payouts. That limit will increase from £1 million to £1.4 million, and will apply for six months from the point the balance enters the account.

The FSCS is funded through a levy on PRA- and FCA-regulated firms, rather than taxpayers.

Read more:
UK bank deposit protection to rise to £120,000 from December

Eight companies are under formal investigation by the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) over concerns about online pricing tactics, marking the regulator’s first major enforcement action under its strengthened consumer protection powers.

The firms — StubHub, Viagogo, AA Driving School, BSM Driving School, Gold’s Gym, Wayfair, Appliances Direct and Marks Electrical — are being examined as part of a wide-ranging review into how businesses display and structure online prices. The CMA is also writing to a further 100 companies to warn them about potential breaches relating to additional fees, pressure selling and misleading sales tactics.

CMA chief executive Sarah Cardell said consumers should be able to trust that the prices they see online are genuine and complete.
“At a time when household budgets are under constant pressure and we’re all hunting for the best deal possible, it’s crucial that people can shop online with confidence, knowing that the price they see is the price they’ll pay,” she said. “Any sales must be genuine.”

The investigations follow a major review launched in April in which the CMA assessed price transparency practices at more than 400 businesses across the economy. Regulators are particularly concerned about “drip pricing”, where customers are shown a low initial price but encounter additional fees only during checkout, and about the use of countdown clocks and other pressure-based selling tactics.

The cases are the first to be opened under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act, introduced last year, which gives the CMA unprecedented enforcement powers. The watchdog can now determine for itself whether consumer law has been broken — without taking cases to court — and can order firms to pay compensation or impose fines of up to 10% of global turnover.

The CMA has yet to confirm a timeline for the investigations but said further enforcement action is likely as the regulator continues its sector-wide review. The businesses named have the right to respond, and the CMA has not yet concluded whether any breaches have occurred.

Read more:
Eight firms investigated over online pricing as CMA exercises new powers

The UK’s corporate register is expected to shrink significantly over the next year as new identity verification rules for company directors and beneficial owners come into force on Tuesday, according to specialists in corporate transparency and financial crime.

From 18 November, all new directors and persons with significant control (PSCs) must verify their identity with Companies House before they can form or run a company. Existing directors and PSCs will be phased into the system over the next 12 months, completing verification when they next file a confirmation statement. Acting as a director without verification will become a criminal offence.

The reforms are aimed at tackling fraud, money laundering and the misuse of shell companies by ensuring that “the people setting up, running and controlling companies are who they say they are,” Companies House said. More than one million people have already verified their identities, with up to seven million more expected to complete the process over the next year.

But experts say the immediate impact will be visible in the number of new incorporations — and the size of the UK company register more broadly.

Corporate filings and financial crime expert Graham Barrow predicts that incorporation levels will “fall off a cliff” from Tuesday onwards as those unwilling to disclose their identity drop out of the system.

“There will be a whole bunch of people who have no intention of going through the process,” he said. “We are likely to see a significant slimming-down of the register over the next year.”

Barrow stressed that any reduction should not be taken as a sign of weakening economic activity. “Most of these companies will be linked to people who do not have the best intentions being forced to think again. There is no evidence that the size of the register correlates with legitimate economic impact.”

As of September, the UK’s corporate register listed 5.5 million companies, more than 500,000 of which were already in the process of dissolution or liquidation. Registered agents — including solicitors, accountants and formation agents — will be able to verify clients’ identities on their behalf.

However, Barrow warned that the reforms could fuel a rise in attempts to evade the rules, including the use of “ghost directors” — individuals paid to lend their identity to conceal the real operators of a business. “There has already been a significant increase in British proxy directors being paid to front what are actually overseas-controlled companies,” he said. Payments of around £500 per identity are “not uncommon”.

An investigation by The Times last year uncovered directors being paid to act as fronts for failing companies, enabling true owners to escape scrutiny. Three individuals involved in the scheme have since been banned from running companies.

Alongside identity verification, legal experts say a second major shift is set to reshape corporate governance: a new investigative duty placed on companies themselves.

Hamish Perry, Partner at Charles Russell Speechlys, said businesses must now proactively investigate who their PSCs are.

“From 18 November, companies must take additional steps to identify who their PSCs are, including serving formal notices on anyone they believe may hold that information,” he said. “There is also a duty to notify Companies House where a company suspects someone has become a PSC or relevant legal entity, even if the person hasn’t confirmed it.”

Perry said the changes represent a “significant raising of the bar” for corporate transparency: “Businesses with complex ownership structures or incomplete shareholder information will be particularly affected. They will need to implement clear internal processes to investigate and report their PSCs.”

The reforms coincide with the abolition of statutory registers and more stringent filing requirements, placing companies under far greater scrutiny.
“This is not just a legal change,” Perry added. “It’s a shift towards much greater regulatory accountability.”

Read more:
New director verification rules ‘will cut corporate register’, experts warn

If you live in an older home, chances are you’ve heard of a back boiler. These were popular heating systems installed behind fireplaces. They provided hot water and heating by burning gas or solid fuel. But today, back boilers are outdated, inefficient, and even unsafe.

So, if you still have one, you might be thinking about replacing it. But how much does it cost to replace a back boiler? The answer isn’t simple. Several factors affect the total price, such as the new system you choose, the condition of your current system, and the size of your home.

In this guide, we’ll break it all down for you. You’ll learn what back boilers are, why they need replacing, and the full cost involved. We’ll also help you understand your options and what to expect during the process.

What Is a Back Boiler?

A back boiler is a small boiler unit that sits behind a fireplace or stove. It heats water for radiators and taps. It became popular in the UK in the 1960s and 70s.

These boilers worked well at the time. But over the years, they’ve proven to be less energy-efficient and harder to maintain than modern systems. Many back boilers are no longer supported or are illegal to repair due to safety rules.

Why Should You Replace a Back Boiler?

Here are the main reasons people go for a back boiler replacement grant:

1. Low Efficiency

Back boilers usually have an energy efficiency rating of around 70%. In comparison, modern condensing boilers can reach over 90%. That means you’re likely wasting energy and paying higher bills with a back boiler.

2. Safety Risks

Some old back boilers, especially the Baxi Bermuda models, were found to be dangerous if not properly maintained. Cracks and leaks can lead to carbon monoxide leaks. Many models are now banned or discontinued.

3. Repair Problems

Replacement parts are hard to find. Skilled engineers who can work on back boilers are also rare. Most professionals recommend removing them altogether.

4. Legal & Compliance Issues

Current building regulations make it almost impossible to fit a new back boiler. If you plan on selling or renting your home, you may have to replace the old system to meet the standards.

What Are the Back Boiler Replacement Options?

When replacing a back boiler, you have three main options. Each one affects the total cost.

1. Combi Boiler

A combi (combination) boiler is the most popular option. It heats water on demand and doesn’t require a hot water cylinder or storage tank. It’s compact and ideal for smaller homes.

Pros:

Saves space
Lower running costs
Energy-efficient

Cons:

May struggle with high hot water demand

2. System Boiler

A system boiler needs a separate hot water cylinder but no cold-water tank. It works well in larger homes where hot water is needed in multiple places at once.

Pros:

Good for homes with multiple bathrooms
Works well with solar panels

Cons:

Takes more space than a combi boiler

3. Regular or Heat-Only Boiler

This is the closest match to your back boiler setup. It uses a hot water cylinder and a cold-water tank. If your house already has this system, it may be cheaper to upgrade this way.

Pros:

Keeps the same layout
Ideal for older properties

Cons:

Less efficient than modern combi boilers

Cost of Back Boiler Replacement

Let’s get to the big question: How much does it cost to replace a back boiler? Here’s a breakdown of all the costs involved.

1. Boiler Unit Cost

Combi Boiler: £1,500 – £2,500
System Boiler: £1,600 – £2,700
Regular Boiler: £1,400 – £2,500

The price depends on the brand, size, and energy rating. Popular brands like Worcester Bosch, Vaillant, and Ideal may cost more but come with longer warranties.

2. Installation Cost

The installation work is often the biggest part of the total cost. A back boiler replacement is not a simple switch. It requires:

Removing the old back boiler
Changing the pipework
Installing the new boiler elsewhere
Sealing off or removing the fireplace
Fixing walls and redecorating

Expect to pay between £2,000 – £3,000 for installation alone.

3. Additional Parts & Labour

You may also need extra materials like:

New flue or plume kit: £100 – £300
New controls or smart thermostat: £100 – £250
Magnetic filter: £100 – £150
Power flush of the system: £300 – £600

Labour and time will also increase if your home has difficult access, outdated pipework, or if you’re moving the boiler far from the original spot.

Total Estimated Cost

Let’s put it all together.

Option
Boiler + Install + Extras

Combi Boiler
£3,500 – £5,000

System Boiler
£3,800 – £5,500

Regular Boiler
£3,400 – £5,000

These are ballpark figures for a standard 2–3 bedroom home in the UK. The final cost depends on your property, location, and choice of boiler.

How Long Does It Take to Replace a Back Boiler?

Most back boiler replacement jobs take 3 to 5 days. Here’s why:

Day 1–2: Removing the old boiler and fireplace work
Day 3–4: Installing the new boiler and connecting new pipes
Day 5: Testing, power flushing, and final checks

If there are complications, it may take longer. But a trained engineer can give a clearer time estimate after inspecting your home.

Can I Get Help with the Cost?

Yes! Several UK schemes can help with the cost of back boiler replacement:

1. Boiler Upgrade Scheme (BUS)

This helps homeowners switch to low-carbon heating. You could get up to £7,500 for replacing your boiler with a heat pump or renewable system.

2. ECO4 Scheme

If you’re on certain benefits, you may qualify for a free boiler replacement under the Energy Company Obligation scheme. This includes removing back boilers in some cases.

3. Finance Options

Many boiler companies offer payment plans or 0% finance. This can help you spread the cost over 2 to 10 years.

What Happens to the Fireplace?

Since back boilers sit behind fireplaces, you’ll have to deal with the space they leave behind. You have several options:

Block it off completely and plaster over it
Install an electric fire for decoration
Add a cupboard or feature wall

Some homeowners even choose to install a wood-burning stove in the space. Just make sure your installer seals off the chimney properly to avoid draughts or safety issues.

Do I Need Planning Permission?

In most cases, you don’t need planning permission for a back boiler replacement. However:

If your home is listed or in a conservation area, check with your local authority
You’ll need a Gas Safe-registered engineer for any gas work
Building regulations apply to all boiler installations

Always make sure your installer provides a Building Regulations Compliance Certificate after the job is done.

Common Questions About Back Boiler Replacement

Q: Can I repair my old back boiler instead of replacing it?

A: In most cases, no. Replacement parts are rare, and many back boilers are no longer legal to repair.

Q: Is it cheaper to keep my hot water tank?

A: Sometimes. If you choose a system or regular boiler, you can use your current tank. But if it’s old, replacing it may still be best.

Q: What’s the best boiler for replacing a back boiler?

A: For smaller homes, a combi boiler is ideal. For larger homes, a system boiler may be better.

Final Thoughts

Replacing a back boiler is a big job. But it’s often necessary for safety, efficiency, and comfort. While it may cost between £3,500 and £5,500, the long-term savings on your energy bills make it worth it.

Choosing the right system depends on your home’s size, layout, and hot water needs. A registered installer can help you pick the best option and handle the process safely.

Whether you go for a combi, system, or regular boiler, make sure to compare prices, ask for warranties, and check if you qualify for any Eco4 Scheme grants.

Back boiler replacement might seem costly up front, but it’s a smart move for a warmer, safer, and more efficient home.

Read more:
How Much Does It Cost to Replace a Back Boiler?

Pub operators and hospitality leaders have warned that Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ expected tax raid on gaming machines could inflict serious damage on an industry already battling soaring costs, staff shortages and fragile consumer confidence.

With speculation mounting that the Chancellor will sharply increase Machine Gaming Duty (MGD) in the November 26 Budget, trade bodies say the move risks pulling away one of the last remaining revenue supports for thousands of community pubs.

Fruit machines have been part of Britain’s pub culture for more than 50 years, and although their numbers have declined since their heyday, they remain an essential income stream. According to UKHospitality, almost 36,700 fruit and slot machines operate across nearly half of the UK’s pubs, generating £622 million annually. Once taxes, supplier rent and other charges are deducted, operators are left with an estimated £385 million — or roughly £8,500 per pub — at a time when margins are already “wafer thin”.

Fears have intensified following reports that Reeves is preparing significant increases in gambling taxes to help plug a £30 billion hole in the public finances. Proposals being discussed include raising sports betting duties from 15% to 30% and lifting duty on machine and online slots from 20% to 50%. For pubs, whose gaming machines are low-stakes and incidental to their core trade, industry leaders say such a jump would be devastating.

Lawson Mountstevens, managing director of Heineken-owned Star Pubs, said pubs are already under “tremendous pressure” following last year’s steep rise in Employer National Insurance and the national minimum wage. “Our low-stakes machines are an important revenue stream. Any move that erodes their value puts further strain on our ability to serve communities up and down the UK.”

That sentiment is shared across the sector. James Baer, executive chairman of Amber Taverns, said increasing MGD for machines that are “ancillary” to pubs’ main purpose would be another “unwelcome setback” after what he described as a “savage attack” on hospitality last year.

Greene King chief executive Nick Mackenzie warned that the measure may “inadvertently be the tipping point” for pubs already grappling with an “avalanche of costs”. The British Beer & Pub Association (BBPA) estimates a rise in MGD to 50% would cost pubs £187 million a year, equivalent to 16,300 jobs.

Emma McClarkin, chief executive of the BBPA, said the impact could be catastrophic. “These are low-margin businesses that create huge numbers of jobs for young people. Any increase in the cost of doing business brings them closer to closing their doors for good.”

Analysts believe listed pub companies could also face significant hits. At JD Wetherspoon — already absorbing £60 million in additional annual costs due to labour changes — Peel Hunt analyst Douglas Jack estimates a move to 50% MGD would cost the group £18 million. Founder Sir Tim Martin said gaming machines may represent a small portion of Wetherspoon’s sales, but remain “an important part of pub economics” and are “already highly taxed”. Another increase would be “another straw on the camel’s back”.

The industry fears the government’s calculations are flawed. Rather than bringing in more revenue, higher taxes could make many machines unprofitable, prompting their removal and actually reducing the total tax take. Chris Jowsey, chief executive of Admiral Taverns, warned the move would have a “devastating impact”, cutting income for pubs in areas where alternative revenue streams are limited. At Admiral Taverns’ 1,300 pubs, machines currently generate around £6,000 net revenue per year; under the proposed tax rate, this would fall to £2,625.

Alongside financial pressures, industry leaders say the timing could not be worse. New projections from the BBPA suggest 332 pubs will have closed by the time the Chancellor delivers her Budget. The concern is that an MGD rise will accelerate the decline of one of Britain’s most cherished community institutions.

Trade bodies including the BBPA and UKHospitality are now urging the government to freeze duty on Category C low-stakes fruit machines and Category D arcade-style penny fall machines — both of which are disproportionately used in pubs and leisure venues.

Kate Nicholls, chairwoman of UKHospitality, said that for many pubs, machine income has become “increasingly important” as they deal with spiralling operational costs. Raising MGD on these machines, she said, would be “detrimental” to the long-term health of the sector.

A Treasury spokesperson said tax decisions will be announced at the Budget, adding that its consultation on gambling taxation is focused on remote betting websites, which employ fewer people, have lower costs, and deliver higher profits than traditional venues.

Industry leaders remain unconvinced. “This would not deliver the intended yields,” Jowsey said. “It would accelerate pub closures, cut jobs, hollow out high streets and likely reduce the overall tax take. It would feel like the rug is being pulled out from beneath community pubs.”

Read more:
Reeves’ fruit machine tax ‘would gamble with pubs’ futures’, industry warns

When I first started taking clients out for dinner, you could sit under the copper dome of Le Gavroche, order a bottle of claret you’d never dare drink at home, and—after a couple of courses, a soufflé, and a few discreet nods from the maître d’—leave only mildly lighter in wallet and spirit.

Today, on the same site, you can do much the same thing at Matt Abé’s new venture Bonheur. Only now, the bill for two will come in at £250 before you’ve even blinked at the digestif list.

I’m not one for false nostalgia—restaurants must evolve, chefs must be paid, and if anyone’s earned the right to resurrect a Mayfair temple of gastronomy it’s Abé. But there’s a creeping sense that fine dining has priced itself into absurdity. And for once, it’s not just about greedy restaurateurs; it’s about the country we’ve built around them.

Energy bills have soared. Not just yours or mine, but those of restaurants that rely on gas ranges, endless refrigeration, and enough light to flatter every banker’s jowls. Add to that the cost of labour in an industry already haemorrhaging staff post-Brexit, and suddenly that tasting menu looks less like an indulgence and more like a desperate act of financial survival.

The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, would like us to believe that things are finally “stabilising”. I’ve seen more stability in a soufflé during a Tube strike. Her Treasury may be trying to keep business afloat, but when small restaurants are seeing energy costs double, the effect is akin to throwing a life jacket to a man who’s already under the water.

Fine dining, long the glitzy tip of the hospitality iceberg, is the first to feel the cracks. It was never about volume or turnover; it was about art. A kitchen like Abé’s depends on precision, patience, and prodigiously expensive ingredients that can’t be bought in bulk. When your butter alone costs more than most people’s rent, “value for money” ceases to be a meaningful phrase.

Once upon a time, £160-£180 for two was a generous way to mark a birthday or sign a contract. Now it’s merely the entry fee for breathing the same air as a Michelin inspector. And before the chorus begins: yes, I know what goes into it. I’ve sat in enough stainless-steel kitchens to appreciate the choreography of twenty cooks plating thirty dishes in silence. I know the rent in Mayfair. I know what happens to a menu when olive oil triples in price.

But—and forgive the sentimentality—I also know what a restaurant used to mean. At Le Coq d’Argent or Claridge’s or Marcus Wareing’s at the Berkeley, you could justify the expense as part theatre, part negotiation. It was business done in a place that made everyone feel like someone. You weren’t buying food; you were buying atmosphere, attention, and a tiny square of London’s self-confidence.

Today, that same dinner feels faintly transactional. The food is exquisite, the wine list terrifyingly precise, and yet something human has been lost. When you know a single starter costs as much as the average family’s weekly shop, the pleasure sours slightly. The magic evaporates with the steam from the consommé.

Reeves’ problem—indeed, the country’s problem—is that we’ve stopped treating restaurants as part of the cultural ecosystem. When energy prices bite, when VAT hovers at the same rate as fast food, and when landlords charge what they like, the effect isn’t just fewer Michelin stars; it’s fewer apprentices, fewer suppliers, fewer reasons for tourists to bother crossing the Channel for dinner.

You can’t build an “innovation economy” on empty stomachs. Yet that’s what we seem to be trying. The government talks endlessly about growth while allowing one of Britain’s finest export industries—its hospitality scene—to suffocate under the weight of its own bills. Paris subsidises its bistros. Copenhagen practically canonises its chefs. In London, we just raise the price of the tasting menu and pretend everything’s fine.

Of course, there will always be those for whom £250 is a rounding error. The same crowd who will book Bonheur weeks ahead and post filtered shots of their langoustine tartlets. They’re not the problem. The problem is the steady disappearance of the middle ground—the diners who once treated a grand restaurant as a reachable luxury. Those people are now in bistros, if they’re out at all, calculating the cost of bread service.

When I took clients to the Savoy or Claridge’s, it wasn’t just about indulgence; it was diplomacy. Deals were signed over lamb cutlets and laughter. You can’t do that if your guest is nervously Googling “how much to tip on £500”. Fine dining relied on aspiration, not intimidation.

Perhaps we should stop pretending fine dining is for everyone. Let it be what it now is: haute couture, admired from afar. But if we do, we must also accept that Britain loses something. Our restaurants have long been the quiet stages of our national life—places where ambition met artistry, where even a tax accountant could feel momentarily glamorous.

Reeves can’t control every gas bill, but she can recognise that hospitality is not a luxury to be tolerated; it’s a craft to be preserved. Energy relief for small restaurants, tax breaks for training, a re-think of VAT for the sector—none of it would cost much compared to the cultural value at stake.

Because once the £250 dinner becomes the norm, it stops being dinner. It becomes a ceremony for the few, performed behind heavy curtains while the rest of us eat at home and wonder when exactly Britain forgot how to go out.

Read more:
Fine dining’s death by a thousand cuts, and at least a £250 bill

Stepping away from a successful career in technology to pursue a long-held creative ambition is no small leap, yet that is precisely what Sarah Haran did.

Today, she heads the British luxury accessories brand that bears her name, celebrated for workmanship, colour and a modular design concept that gives customers “one bag, endless looks”.

From her studio to the atelier in Istanbul where each piece is crafted by hand from Italian leather, Haran has created a label defined not just by design but by purpose: handbags that bring joy to women’s lives, offering both style and versatility. With a loyal following across the UK and US, she has carved out a niche rooted in quality, creativity and customer connection.

What do you currently do at Sarah Haran Accessories?

As Founder and CEO, Haran occupies the unusual space where corporate discipline meets creative freedom. She continues to design every collection, guide the brand’s creative direction and oversee marketing, ensuring that each touchpoint reflects the central values of joy, versatility and craftsmanship.

“No two days are the same,” she says. “I might be reviewing new samples in the morning and hosting a live styling session in the afternoon. That blend of communication and creativity is what energises me.”

Her focus, she explains, is unwavering: to make handbags that are as functional as they are beautiful. From leather quality to colour palette to how each piece adapts to a customer’s day, Haran is closely involved in every detail. “Everything comes back to one idea — making women’s lives easier, while bringing them joy.”

What was the inspiration behind your business?

The spark came from a personal frustration: the struggle to find a handbag that was luxurious yet practical, stylish yet adaptable. “I wanted something that could evolve with my day without needing to change bags,” Haran says. This desire became the foundation of her modular handbag system, enabling women to customise their look with interchangeable accessories.

Two years of development followed, working with expert craftspeople to refine every element until function and elegance sat perfectly in balance. The result is a collection designed not only to suit any occasion but to empower its wearer.

Her purpose remains clear. “We talk about bringing women ‘bags of joy’ — and that comes from listening to our customers. Their stories, how the bags fit into their lives, inspire me constantly. It’s about much more than handbags — it’s about helping women feel confident, organised and joyful every day.”

Who do you admire?

Haran’s influences are wide-ranging, anchored in respect for women who embody resilience, ambition and kindness. “My mother showed me that drive and compassion can absolutely go hand-in-hand,” she reflects.

She cites admiration for the Queen’s quiet loyalty and sense of duty, Victoria Beckham’s reinvention and work ethic, and Katie Piper’s extraordinary courage and optimism. She also acknowledges broadcaster Anthea Turner for her generous support of the brand and her ability to remain relevant with grace.

Closer to home, Haran praises Lynne Kennedy of Business Women Scotland for her work championing female entrepreneurs. But it is her own customers who, she says, inspire her most deeply. “Some have been with us since the very beginning. Their loyalty and encouragement are a constant source of motivation.”

Looking back, is there anything you would have done differently?

“If anything, I’d have started sooner,” Haran admits. “Building a brand takes far longer than people expect — it’s years of learning, refining and staying resilient.”

Yet she is quick to acknowledge the value of her previous career. Her years in technology taught her discipline, strategic thinking and the structural foundations needed to scale a business sustainably. “So while an earlier start might have accelerated growth, I’m grateful for what those corporate years gave me.”

If she could advise her younger self, she’d keep it simple: be patient, learn constantly, and recognise that each challenge strengthens the path ahead. “Every day really is a school day — the journey is longer and harder than you imagine, but every lesson counts.”

What defines your way of doing business?

One word, Haran says, sums it up: joy. It runs through her designs, her brand communications and her approach to customer relationships. “Luxury shouldn’t feel cold or distant,” she explains. “It should feel uplifting, thoughtful and genuinely personal.”

She places strong emphasis on fairness, kindness and creativity, prioritising long-term relationships over quick wins. Whether working with her team, suppliers or customers, the goal is to build a brand that people enjoy being part of.

“The business was founded on the idea of joy, and that continues to guide every decision. When you lead with joy, it changes the way you design, work and grow.”

What advice would you give to someone starting out?

Her first piece of advice is deceptively simple: begin before you feel ready. “There’s no perfect moment,” she says. “Progress comes from taking action, not waiting.”

She recommends finding a clear sense of purpose, something steady to return to on difficult days. For Haran, that purpose is helping women feel confident through design.

She also stresses the importance of surrounding yourself with people who share your values, who challenge you in the right ways, and who believe in your vision. “Listen to advice, but trust your instincts. Stay curious. Building a business is constant learning — and you simply don’t know what you don’t know. Forgive yourself as you go.”

Read more:
Getting to know you: Sarah Haran, Founder & CEO, Sarah Haran Accessories

Female entrepreneurs across the UK are working longer hours, taking on second jobs and facing renewed financial strain as economic pressures mount, according to a major new study from Tide and everywoman.

The Female Business Owners Index 2025 reveals that 39 per cent of women founders say this year has been harder than 2024, with falling consumer spending, inflation and political uncertainty continuing to squeeze margins and stall growth.

Despite the tough trading environment, the research paints a picture of extraordinary resilience. A growing number of women are pushing themselves harder to keep their businesses afloat, with more than half now working longer hours and almost one in four taking a second job to sustain their ventures. Many say the economic climate has made entrepreneurship increasingly demanding, with weaker household spending power affecting more than a third of women-led companies. Inflationary pressures and political instability have also contributed to a challenging year.

Even so, optimism remains strikingly strong. Two-thirds of female entrepreneurs expect their revenues to rise over the next 12 months, and nearly one in five believe the year ahead could be transformational, predicting revenue increases of up to 100 per cent. Rather than waiting for conditions to improve, many are pursuing bold expansion strategies, exploring new markets, investing in digitisation and looking to grow their teams. There is also a renewed focus on upskilling, with a significant proportion of founders identifying training and capability building as essential to their growth plans.

However, access to finance remains one of the most persistent barriers facing women in business. Despite their ambition, female founders continue to receive a disproportionately small share of UK investment, with just two pence in every pound of equity funding going to women-led ventures.

Nearly a third of the women surveyed said that the difficulty of securing loans or investment capital is limiting their ability to scale, while many called for targeted grants and tax relief to help navigate the economic environment. Confidence also plays a role, with a quarter of respondents admitting that self-doubt has held them back, and a similar proportion citing gaps in operational or financial knowledge as impediments.

Tide, which has spent the past three years supporting thousands of women through its Women in Business programme, says targeted support remains essential. The company is on track to meet its pledge of helping launch 200,000 female-led businesses by 2027 and has joined forces with everywoman on a new year-long initiative designed to equip women entrepreneurs with the practical tools, contacts and confidence they need to scale.

The report’s findings will also inform the Tide everywoman Entrepreneur Awards, where one exceptional female-founded small business will receive a £20,000 grant to accelerate growth. The awards, held in association with BGF, take place on 2 December at The Londoner in Leicester Square.

George Schmidt, CEO of Tide UK/Europe, said the findings demonstrate the determination of women entrepreneurs across the country. He said that many are working harder than ever, taking on additional jobs and still maintaining the ambition to grow, noting that “the fortitude of women entrepreneurs across the UK is remarkable”. He added that Tide remains committed to breaking down the barriers that hinder women’s success.

Nicole Goodwin, joint managing director of AllBright everywoman, said that female founders were showing “true grit” and that their optimism was not misplaced but strategic, enabling women-led companies to remain a force for innovation despite the headwinds.

Among the founders featured in the report was Fallon Nelson, who runs inclusive lingerie brand Empress Me Intimates. She said access to funding had been one of her biggest challenges, even with strong demand and proven need. She remains optimistic, however, and plans to continue growing her community through events, storytelling campaigns and collaborations while she continues to seek financial backing.

Read more:
Quarter of female business owners take second jobs as economic pressures intensify, Tide and everywoman report shows

A British man jailed in the United States for hacking the Twitter accounts of high-profile figures including Barack Obama and Jeff Bezos has been ordered to hand over £4.1 million in cryptocurrency linked to his crimes.

Joseph James O’Connor, 26, was sentenced in the US last year after admitting to his role in a sophisticated cyberattack that saw him gain access to dozens of celebrity and corporate Twitter accounts. He used the compromised profiles to promote fraudulent Bitcoin schemes, scamming victims worldwide. O’Connor also threatened several celebrities with the release of private messages and images unless they paid him in cryptocurrency.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has now secured a Civil Recovery Order to seize 42 Bitcoin — along with other digital assets — that O’Connor obtained through the scheme. The recovered cryptocurrency is worth approximately £4.1 million at today’s market value.

The CPS Proceeds of Crime Division worked closely with agencies in the United States and Spain, where O’Connor was arrested, to ensure he could not conceal or transfer the assets before the order was enforced.

Adrian Foster, Chief Crown Prosecutor for the CPS Proceeds of Crime Division, said the action demonstrates the reach of UK authorities even when offenders are convicted overseas.

“Joseph James O’Connor targeted well-known individuals and used their accounts to scam people out of their crypto assets and money,” he said. “We were able to use the full force of our powers to ensure that even when someone is not convicted in the UK, we can still prevent them from benefiting from their criminality.”

O’Connor was a central figure in the July 2020 Twitter breach, one of the platform’s most significant security failures. The attack compromised accounts belonging to political leaders, billionaires, celebrities and major brands, prompting international investigations and widespread concern over the security of social media platforms.

Read more:
Twitter hacker ordered to repay £4.1m in Bitcoin after celebrity account scam