United Site Services' notice of entry and effective date, filed on March 5, 2026, says the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey entered the confirmation order on February 27, 2026 and that the plan went effective on March 3, 2026. The company said on March 5 that it had completed its recapitalization.
Platinum acquired United Site Services in 2017 and later rolled the company into a 2021 continuation fund, but the First Day Declaration says a 2024 recapitalization, continued construction weakness, inflation in labor and equipment inputs, and 2025 forbearance agreements still left the business overleveraged. By the petition date, Bloomberg had reported about $2.8 billion in funded debt. The confirmed plan cancelled existing equity interests and issued new common shares through the restructuring transactions described in the confirmation and backstop papers.
Trade coverage also identified the advisor groups behind that fast track. ABF Journal reported the debtors were advised by Milbank, PJT Partners, Alvarez & Marsal and FTI Consulting, while the ad hoc lender group was advised by Akin Gump and Centerview.
The debtors filed the plan and disclosure statement on day one, followed with a plan supplement in January, and then moved for approval of the equity backstop that would fund the new capital structure. The court held a combined hearing on disclosure statement adequacy and plan confirmation on February 25, 2026. The confirmation hearing transcript shows debtors' counsel telling Judge Michael B. Kaplan that the remaining major dispute with CastleKnight had been resolved through mediation and that the debtors expected the effective date within days.
The backstop order and the confirmation order were entered on February 27, 2026. The March 5 notice says the plan went effective on March 3, 2026. The company said on March 5 that it had exited the restructuring with lower funded debt, new equity capital and new credit facilities. Bloomberg Law had earlier reported the company filed its chapter 11 case in New Jersey. The docket remained open after the effective date for post-confirmation administration.
Equity Cancellation and Lender-Backed Recapitalization
The confirmation order places existing equity interests in a deemed rejecting class that receives no property under the plan. It also says plan implementation included the issuance of new common shares, the consummation of the equity rights offering and the incurrence of the new exit facilities.
The backstop motion describes a roughly $480 million equity capital raise in which commitment parties directly subscribed for 30% of the new common shares and backstopped a rights offering for the remaining 70%. The filing also says the commitment parties included members of the ad hoc lender group and CastleKnight Management LP.
The public filings do not include a final percentage ownership table by holder. They show existing equity was cancelled, new common shares were issued at emergence through the lender-backed rights offering and direct investment, and CastleKnight moved from objector to a commitment party in that financing.
Construction Downturn and the 2024 Recapitalization
In the first day declaration, United Site Services said construction activity accounted for more than 70% of revenue and that weakening demand in construction, rising labor and equipment costs, and competitive pricing pressure undermined profitability.
Those problems persisted even after a 2024 recapitalization. The declaration says that transaction exchanged most secured and unsecured funded debt for new secured debt with extended maturities, reduced net debt by about $200 million through discounts and raised $300 million of new capital. By June 2025 the company was facing renewed liquidity pressure around interest payments, and by September 2025 it had entered forbearance agreements with key lender constituencies. Bloomberg Law reported in October 2025 that the company had entered forbearance after missing interest payments.
The debtors did not point to a single lost contract, legal judgment or isolated shock. They pointed to slower construction demand, higher operating costs and pricing pressure after the 2024 recapitalization. Reuters described the debt as having become unsustainable partly because of construction weakness and inflation.
CastleKnight Settlement and Backstop Participation
Early in the case, the dispute centered on the consequences of the 2024 recapitalization and what some filings described as "double dip" treatment. CreditSights wrote that CastleKnight planned to challenge the 2024 "double dip" even as the debtors were pushing the prearranged plan toward confirmation. By confirmation, the debtors had resolved that objection through a settlement that changed class treatment and financing participation.
The confirmation-support declaration says a January 26, 2026 settlement with CastleKnight created separate treatment for class 6a second-out claims and class 6b amended term loan claims, provided limited fee reimbursement, mutual releases, governance rights for CastleKnight and an extra $14 million of debt under the exit term loan facility. The debtors said the settlement improved recoveries, avoided litigation and supported a consensual emergence.
At the confirmation hearing, debtors' counsel told the court CastleKnight had agreed to vote for the plan, would receive $10.5 million in cash and $14 million in take-back debt, and would participate as a backstop commitment party for the equity rights offering and exit term loan facility.
The Voting Declaration and confirmation findings show that each voting class accepted the plan, and the confirmation order says the economic changes to classes 6a and 6b were agreed to under the CastleKnight settlement, with holders of 92.87% in amount of class 6a claims affirmatively supporting those changes.
Exit Financing and the $480 Million Equity Raise
The company said the restructuring would reduce funded debt by about $2.4 billion. Coverage put the new-capital package at approximately $1.1 billion, structured as a mix of new equity and exit debt facilities.
The equity piece was the $480 million rights offering and direct investment structure described in the backstop motion. The debt piece included about $300 million of exit term financing and approximately $295 million of additional asset-based and other revolving loans, structured as an Exit ABL Facility and an Exit RCF Facility. In parallel, the case used a $120 million DIP facility to bridge the company through confirmation and effectiveness.
The confirmation order's effective-date conditions required the restructuring support agreement, backstop agreement and exit term commitment letter to remain in force, the definitive documents to be executed, the exit facilities to be effective, the equity rights offering to be consummated and the new common shares to be issued.
Final Decree and Post-Confirmation Claims Administration
The case remained active after the March 3, 2026 effective date. On April 16, 2026, the court entered a final decree closing all but one of the chapter 11 cases. One reorganized debtor entity, PECF USS Intermediate Holding II Corporation, remained open for continued post-confirmation administration, according to the quarterly post-confirmation report filed April 24, 2026. The court approved fee applications for retained professionals in orders entered May 11, 2026.
Post-confirmation claims administration is ongoing. The remaining debtor filed a first omnibus objection to claims on May 14, 2026, seeking to disallow claims that the reorganized debtors intend to resolve outside the chapter 11 process. The same day, the debtor filed notices identifying 86 claims that had been satisfied or were otherwise duplicative.
Review The United Site Services Docket With ElevenFlo
Ask our AI chat to review the United Site Services docket, including the key filings, orders and deadlines behind this case. For broader restructuring workflow access, see ElevenFlo's plans and pricing.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did United Site Services emerge from chapter 11?
Yes. The company said it had completed its recapitalization on March 5, 2026, after the filing record fixed the plan effective date at March 3.
Who owns United Site Services now?
The public filings show that existing equity was wiped out and that new common shares were issued through a lender-backed equity raise. Early coverage reported that lenders were taking control, and the final court papers show the new equity was issued through the rights offering and direct investment structure in the backstop motion and confirmation order.
What happened to Platinum Equity?
Platinum Equity was the prepetition sponsor, having acquired United Site Services in 2017. Under the confirmed plan, existing equity interests received no property, so the sponsor's prepetition ownership did not survive emergence.
What role did CastleKnight play in the final plan?
CastleKnight started as an objector but later settled with the debtors. Octus reported that the debtors were trying to bring holdout CastleKnight into the backstop and exit financing, and the final court record shows CastleKnight joined the financing structure.
Is the case still open?
Yes, in part. The court entered a final decree on April 16, 2026, closing all but one of the chapter 11 cases. One reorganized debtor, PECF USS Intermediate Holding II Corporation, remains open for ongoing claims administration and post-confirmation reporting; a first omnibus objection to claims was filed May 14, 2026.
For more chapter 11 case coverage, visit the ElevenFlo blog.
Sources
notice of entry and effective date /documents/3c05fea5-f233-4914-800f-f5df04a3f268/
First Day Declaration /documents/1ca9e3c2-1729-4517-b35b-a0469738c99b/
completed its recapitalization https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-site-services-successfully-completes-financial-recapitalization-and-new-growth-investment-302705605.html
acquired United Site Services https://www.platinumequity.com/news/platinum-equity-completes-acquisition-of-united-site/
2021 continuation fund https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/platinum-equity-forms-continuation-fund-to-support-sustained-growth-of-united-site-services-301412747.html
about $2.8 billion in funded debt https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-29/porta-potty-company-sinks-into-bankruptcy-as-backers-cut-debt
more than 75% of eligible creditors https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-site-services-reaches-agreement-with-key-financial-stakeholders-to-position-company-for-future-success-302650047.html
creditor-backed RSA eliminating about $2.4 billion of funded debt https://ionanalytics.com/insights/debtwire/united-site-services-enters-chapter-11-with-creditor-backed-rsa-eliminating-usd-2-4bn-of-debt-case-profile/
Milbank, PJT Partners, Alvarez & Marsal and FTI Consulting https://www.abfjournal.com/united-site-services-voluntarily-files-for-chapter-11-protection/
filed its chapter 11 case in New Jersey https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bankruptcy-law/united-site-services-files-for-ch-11-bankruptcy-in-new-jersey
entered forbearance after missing interest payments https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bankruptcy-law/americas-distress-daily-united-site-services-in-forbearance
unsustainable partly because of construction weakness and inflation https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/port-a-potty-company-files-bankruptcy-wipe-away-24bn-debt-2025-12-29/
75,000 or more customers https://www.unitedsiteservices.com/
CastleKnight planned to challenge the 2024 "double dip" https://know.creditsights.com/insights/us-post-petition-porta-potty-provider-united-site-services-looks-to-flush-away-2-4bn-in-debt-castleknight-will-challenge-2024-double-dip-case-intro/
approximately $1.1 billion https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/united-site-services-reaches-agreement-with-key-financial-stakeholders-to-position-company-for-future-success-bc4ef285?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=AWEtsqexxoGIRPjCDUf29kUNExD512OPsPj_fVfu-INAGMk9oqwK6aZhNnhx&gaa_ts=69917e95&gaa_sig=DriIkpEzMHN_zPjBURKPZLfqmnPpZzZ32B7proXH-9lvTww2eWPLLyU5yV4KbkzTVMcH6w4tSH-lIf9-zJ1k-w%3D%3D
bring holdout CastleKnight into the backstop and exit financing https://octus.com/resources/articles/case-summary-united-site-services/
This article was researched and written with AI assistance, using court filings, public records, and news sources. AI-generated content can contain errors. Verify all information against primary sources before relying on it. This is not legal or financial advice. See the disclaimer.