Company Directors Required to Hand Over Digital ID to Companies House
- Thread starter Kerwin
- Start date
It’s a fair concern, but “bullet proof security” is a bit of a myth in practice—systems can only ever be as secure as the risks they’re designed to manage.
With things like the Online Safety Act, the real challenge is balancing data protection, privacy, and usability, because stronger controls often come with trade-offs in how data is handled and stored. The key is transparency about what’s collected and how it’s secured, rather than assuming anything can be 100% risk-free.
With things like the Online Safety Act, the real challenge is balancing data protection, privacy, and usability, because stronger controls often come with trade-offs in how data is handled and stored. The key is transparency about what’s collected and how it’s secured, rather than assuming anything can be 100% risk-free.
I agree with you in principle, but the Online Safety Act is a terrible example. It is not a great solution for its supposed aims, and in many ways makes things worse.
Got a letter in the post recently for a previous occupant. We've had this place for over 3 years, and the previous occupants were renting so this is for someone that predates them.
It's a business letter, so I thought I'd look them up in case we're down as the registered address for a company. We're not, but we are the correspondence address for a director, who had his ID verified at the back end of last year.
I'll be writing to Companies House then...
It's a business letter, so I thought I'd look them up in case we're down as the registered address for a company. We're not, but we are the correspondence address for a director, who had his ID verified at the back end of last year.
I'll be writing to Companies House then...
Nigel Farage is in violation of his duties to submit the confirmation statement and verify his ID as director of his company. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/07650770
And this guy want to be PM, FFS.
And this guy want to be PM, FFS.
So in your opinion anyone who is late submitting the Companies confirmation statement and verify their ID, which I may add I still have plenty of clients who have not, should not be able to achieve something else?
- Original Poster
- #48
I understand what you are saying but politicians should set a standard for other people to follow. Therefore they need to be extra vigilant when it comes to following the rules.
Apologies, I must have missed all the Labour & Conservative politicians setting the standards!
You didn’t say ‘anyone’ but I did, you mention 1 person, why?
Why do I need to give examples, I am merely pointing out that plenty of people miss submitting the CS on time every year which is no big deal, various reasons why this happens so not sure why you have decided to use this person as an example, is it just because they are high profile and you don’t like them?
Got a letter in the post recently for a previous occupant. We've had this place for over 3 years, and the previous occupants were renting so this is for someone that predates them.
It's a business letter, so I thought I'd look them up in case we're down as the registered address for a company. We're not, but we are the correspondence address for a director, who had his ID verified at the back end of last year.
I'll be writing to Companies House then...
Update on this, for anyone that's interested. It took a week or two, but CH replied to say they'd be contacting the person concerned to tell them to update their details, and if they didn't a "default" address would be used. They then sent a letter to my address, addressed to him, telling him to update his details.
The address verification was carried out by an accounting firm in November 2025. I guess it's possible that he's not updated his driving licence, and that was sufficient evidence for them to do the verification.
I have a ltd company client whose previous payroll provider offered to be the contact point for HMRC (strictly against the rules) and one of the directors resigned and was then re-appointed with a slightly different name and the payroll provider's address, so this could happen. The ex-payroll provider then got very upset when they received HMRC letters about this company and demanded that we change the HMRC address. Which we couldn't do as the director's address on Companies House was the one that HMRC used. That director, with a wrong name and address was verified earlier this year by a firm of Chartered Accountants.
Similar threads
Latest Articles
-
Guilty until proven authorised: fighting a false counterfeit reportA UKBF member posted something that will make the stomach drop for anyone who sells on a...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
- 12 min read
-
Growth Britain: what's actually in it for the smallest businesses?John Healey gave his first big speech as chancellor this morning, standing in front of a row of...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
- 7 min read
-
AI can do the typing. It can't sign the accounts.Back in January, a UKBF member called @Byzantium put up a complaint that'll sound familiar to a...- Lord Moore
- Updated:
- 6 min read
-
90,000 jobs are heading your way. Your rates bill might get there firstIf you run a business in Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds or Bristol, you were probably told some...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
- 8 min read
-
How to Price a New Product or Service: We Asked UKBFOn 5 August, @Data Swami posted in the General Business Forum with a question that ought to have...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
- 7 min read