PSC Type Explanations

Person with Significant Control
1

Hi,
I am looking for a bit of guidance on the various PSC types we are seeing.
I am having trouble identifying the difference between
corporate-entity-with-significant-control and corporate-entity-person-with-significant-control

And individual-person-with-significant-control and legal-person-with-significant-control

Can anyone help explain the difference between a corporate-entity and corporate-entity-person
And the difference between individual-person and legal-person?

Thanks,
Arthur

2

I will have to come back to you on the corporate-entity-with-significant-control and corporate-entity-person-with-significant-control issue Arthur.

In the second example, this looks fairly clear however. An individual-person-with-significant-control is self-explanatory and legal-person-with-significant-control is what our technical areas have chosen to use as a description for an Other Registrable Person.

SDN

3

Good morning Arthur,

Can you please clarify where you are seeing the descriptions you have referred to?

individual-person-with-significant-control would be a PSC01 (An Individual)
legal-person-with-significant-control would be the PSC03 (Other Registrable Person)

We are assuming that corporate-entity-with-significant-control is a PSC02 (Relevant legal entity - RLE), but are unsure where you found the corporate-entity-person-with-significant-control element.

Thanks
SDN

4

It is coming back from the new api, the endpoint /company/00000000/persons-with-significant-control.

I will send you a direct email with the company number that has the orporate-entity-person-with-significant-control PSC

5

Thank you for this additional data - I hope to discuss this with a relevant analyst as soon as possible.

SDN

6

Hi, have you been able to find anything out about this record type?

7

I have been away from the office and still need to track down the relevant product analyst.

It does appear however that we may have used different terminology in different services.

SDN

8

Ahh, so its likely to be the same as another type but come in via webfiling vs paperwork vs the api?

One other related thing, I thought the aim of PSC’s were to identify the individuals behind companies. Shouldn’t this mean we don’t see companies on this list?

9

Good afternoon Arthur,

The legislation does allow for companies to be shown as PSCs, this has been the case from the beginning.

On the matter of the corporate entity confusion, you appear to have located a error in the API for which we apolgise.

There should only be THREE options:
corporate-entity-person-with-significant-control
individual-person-with-significant-control
legal-person-with-significant-control

We will look into correctly this as soon as we can.

Can you please confirm that you discovered the incorrect wording in the PSC / Corporate Entity Resourse / Kind location please?

Thanks
SDN

10

Don’t you mean 4 types?
I believe we have also seen the following value.
super-secure-person-with-significant-control
I presume this is just a individual-person-with-significant-control but with protected details.

Thats correct, the kind property contained the incorrect value corporate-entity-with-significant-control

11

Yes sorry,

The Super Secure element is still relevant as well (I will discuss with the analyst though).

Thanks for the confirmation of the kind element.

SDN

12

Hi,
Do you know when you will find out more about the correct types and any changes needed to accomodate these?

Sorry to keep pushing on this!

13

Good morning Arthur,

The Super Secure element is indeed correct and valid!

The error you highlighted is in the process of being rectified.

I hope this is sufficient clarification for you.

SDN

14

Hi,
What form will the fix take? Will you be removing that type from your system?

If so, does this mean the type corporate-entity-with-significant-control will become corporate-entity-person-with-significant-control?

Do you know what date this change will occur one?
We need to remove this incorrect type from our system and I need to ensure this doesn’t happen to soon in case we see the bad type again.

15

Arthur,

The PSC type corporate-entity-with-significant-control exists only in our documentation - e.g. in reality corporate-entity-with-significant-control is already corporate-entity-person-with-significant-control.

Therefore if you are using corporate-entity-with-significant-control as a possible value, it can be removed without consequence.

We don’t have, and never should, have a PSC record stored with a kind of corporate-entity-with-significant-control.

The documentation fix should however go live in the next few weeks.

SDN