Election to keep PSC register information on public register

Incorporation
1

I have noticed on the PDF IN01, that under the Election to keep PSC register information on public register there is an additional checkbox to state that no objection was received by the subscribers from any eligible person within the notice period before making the election.

I can’t anything in the xml that would represent this. Is it not required for electronic filings, or does the Consent Statement cover this?

2

Hi @paula_brady Sorry, I don’t fully understand the question. Please could you clarify.

Nigel Preece

3

I’m wondering if there should be an element in the xml to allow us to confirm that no objections have been received by the subscribers from any eligible person before making the election in relation the PSC register.

4

Hi @paula_brady

Thanks for highlighting this. There should be something to verify all parties involved are aware of the implications of a company electing to hold its PSC Register at Companies House. We are looking into it.

Nigel Preece

5

Would both the “All subscribers elect to keep PSC register…” and “No objection was received by the subscribers…” work hand in hand?, i.e. in order to elect to keep the PSC register information on the public register that they must also have no objections?

Therefore, on the paper form both checkboxes must be ticked. If there were objections, then the neither box can be ticked?

We want to double check what is valid, as Simon has sent to us the new updated v3.1 Incorporation schema, and it suggests that in order to elect to keep the PSC register on the public register, there must have been no objections (i.e. you can only supply a value of true stating there were no objections. You don’t get the option to say they have elected to keep the PSC register on the public register but there were objections, which is what the paper form looks like it could allow you to do, i.e. tick the first box for electing to having the PSC register on the public register, but not tick the second box to say there were no objections).

Ironically, about a month ago I had spotted there was no element for “No objection was received…” from the v3.0 Incorporation schema but was on the paper form. As I would have assume you would not have been able to elect to keep the PSC register on the public register if there were objections. Hence, I thought this was done on purpose at your end, i.e. “kill two birds with one stone” using the boolean PSC element to flag it was true or false, but I guess judging by the new StateNoObjection element this doesn’t seem to be the case.

If you could please clarify this.

Many thanks

6

Thanks for your query I will ask our policy team to look into this for you and get back to you ASAP.

7

Hello,

v3.1 Incorporation schema is correct , in order to elect to keep the PSC register on the public register, there must have been no objections i.e. you can only supply a value of true stating there were no objections.

In section K5 of the paper IN01 (election to keep PSC register information on the public register) both boxes must be ticked. An election can only be made if the subscribers also make the statement that no objection was received from any eligible person within the notice period before making the election.

Hope that clarifies the issue.

Stacey

8

Hi Stacey,

Thanks for this.

Has the new v3.1 Incorporation schema been implemented/rolled out onto the ‘live’ XMLGW site?, or is this still being tested at Companies House?

Many thanks

9

Hi there,

Am just checking with the relevant IT team, will get back to you ASAP.

Stacey

10

Hi Stacey,

Thanks for this.

Simon came back to us yesterday afternoon about this to say it should now have been implemented on the ‘live’ XMLGW site, and so I sent two messages (one for a standard company and one for an LLP), and it failed with the following error:

Error Raised By: CH_XML_Gateway / Number: 100 /
Type: fatal / Location: / XML failed schema validation: Invalid XML: In
element PSC: Can not have element children within a simple type content.
line 46 column 13

I’ve already emailed this to Simon (including the XML).

The XML should be valid (just to double check, I looked at one of the updated examples which had the new “No objection…” element on the XMLGW site and it is outputted in the same way)

I was sending this to the XMLGW site, with the element as 1

Many thanks

11

Thanks we will look into this issue now, was it the LLP INC that you got that error for?

12

I haven’t tried again this morning, but I got the error for both a standard company (IN01), and also an LLP (LLIN01).

The example I sent to Simon was just for a standard company (IN01).

Thanks

13

This is what I am sending in the XML for my IN01:

<RegistersHeldOnPublicRecord>
    <Directors>false</Directors>
    <DirectorsURA>false</DirectorsURA>
    <Secretaries>false</Secretaries>
    <Members>true</Members>
    <PSC>
        <StateNoObjection>true</StateNoObjection>
    </PSC>
</RegistersHeldOnPublicRecord>

This is the example from the XMLGW website:

<RegistersHeldOnPublicRecord>
    <Directors>true</Directors>
    <DirectorsURA>false</DirectorsURA>
    <Secretaries>true</Secretaries>
    <PSC>
        <StateNoObjection>true</StateNoObjection>
    </PSC>
 </RegistersHeldOnPublicRecord>

The syntax looks valid compared to the example on XMLGW.

Thanks

14

Hi,

Which schema are you using with those registers? Is it CompanyIncorporation-v3-0 or CompanyIncorporation-v3-1?

You’d get the error you mentioned if you tried the new PSC register structure (with StateNoObjection sub element) against CompanyIncorporation-v3-0. It’s only valid against 3.1

15

Whoops, sorry my mistake!

School boy error. Forgot to amend the Incorp schema to v3.1

Thanks