Originally posted by NickFitz
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "No one mentioned this? Companies house takes a leaf out of HMRC's book"
Collapse
-
They'd probably have your head on a platter if you were the ones in error. Or maybe they haven't yet quite morphed into HMRC just yet.
Leave a comment:
-
Apparently there was indeed a strict procedure in place, and one part of it was that the company number must be entered, and double-checked, on the relevant paperwork. However, many of CH's staff had never actually read the document defining the procedure, as they thought it was a training document and they figured they already knew what they were doing.Originally posted by RasputinDude View PostWhat strikes me here is how little care CH applied to their processes - there are *loads* of companies with similar names, so why wasn't there a rigorous procedure of checking something unique - like for instance the company registration number?
Shocking failure of management, but I'm sure they'll prove a lot more adept at finding some hapless junior to blame for the whole thing
Leave a comment:
-
You will be threatened with court action for infringing a trademark - which is a whole different area of law.Originally posted by VectraMan View PostI thought company names had to be unique.
Oh well. I'm off to register Apple Computers Ltd. and see what happens.
MacDonalds Restaurants use to go around the world threatening businesses who called themselves "Macdonald" or "Macdonalds" even if they were in different industries. They were finally taken to task by a restaurant in Singapore.
Leave a comment:
-
and I think that also if you are in a different area, so for example the other company was legal firm, than you can have a very similar name.Originally posted by SueEllen View PostBecause it's done on company number.
Plus when you choose a company name you can have a different trading name.
Leave a comment:
-
Got to think about this, but before the credit has been withdrawn, there must be some warning or notice! Why did they not take any action then? A press release would be less expensive than court case for sure. However I totally sympathize with them as a victim of somebody else's blunder.
Leave a comment:
-
Eh? There are b0ll0ck-loads of companies with such similarities .....Originally posted by VectraMan View PostThough the other question is why did they allow two companies to have almost identical names?
Leave a comment:
-
Though the other question is why did they allow two companies to have almost identical names?
Leave a comment:
-
Fair point. If they can be held to account properly and robustly then they might be motivated to reduce the cockup coefficient a lot.Originally posted by tractor View PostIt's high time duty of care was enforced on the civil service and the government.
It matters not the consequences of their incompetence and negligence, people continue to have their lives ruined daily by such cretins.
Yup, it's always a bit more saddening when you see it was an old firm killed off pointlessly.Originally posted by zeitghostDate of Incorporation: 22 August 1900.
So there's 115 years of effort down the tubes.Last edited by TykeMerc; 29 January 2015, 11:12.
Leave a comment:
-
Indeed. Wife and I just been through a load of incompetence from the council when our office building was suddenly added to the Council Tax register and we were handed a large retrospective bill. It only took two month to clear up, but the council were very tight lipped about how that happened. So FOI here I come.Originally posted by tractor View PostThat is the other issue, same with the councils, police, banks and the other financial con merchants. They should be held personally liable. Why should they sit in their nice house, with their nice fire when because they are incompetent, 250 people plus no doubt others in support businesses lose their jobs.
Leave a comment:
-
...
That is the other issue, same with the councils, police, banks and the other financial con merchants. They should be held personally liable. Why should they sit in their nice house, with their nice fire when because they are incompetent, 250 people plus no doubt others in support businesses lose their jobs.Originally posted by VectraMan View Post"Companies House to pay" - who exactly is paying?
It's not like it in any way punishes the people that made the mistake.
Leave a comment:
-
"Companies House to pay" - who exactly is paying?
It's not like it in any way punishes the people that made the mistake.
Leave a comment:
-
...
It's high time duty of care was enforced on the civil service and the government.
It matters not the consequences of their incompetence and negligence, people continue to have their lives ruined daily by such cretins.
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Andrew Griffith MP says Tories would reform IR35 Oct 7 00:41
- New umbrella company JSL rules: a 2026 guide for contractors Oct 5 22:50
- Top 5 contractor compliance challenges, as 2025-26 nears Oct 3 08:53
- Joint and Several Liability ‘won’t retire HMRC's naughty list’ Oct 2 05:28
- What contractors can take from the Industria Umbrella Ltd case Sep 30 23:05
- Is ‘Open To Work’ on LinkedIn due an IR35 dropdown menu? Sep 30 05:57
- IR35: Control — updated for 2025-26 Sep 28 21:28
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 20:17
- Can a WhatsApp message really be a contract? Sep 25 08:17
- ‘Subdued’ IT contractor jobs market took third tumble in a row in August Sep 25 08:07

Leave a comment: