Companies House Accounts Filing

First filing

Didn't find your answer?

Just used the new FRS105 template for the first time.  Just eight numbers to enter and a two sentence note about an overdrawn director's loan.  Arithmetic checked for me.   Like Arlene Foster,  I don't need to bother about every jot and tittle in the company name.  No worries about whether I've typed the number in right.   Acknowledged immediately.  Accepted four minutes later.  Job done.

It's a lot easier than filing with any commercial product I've used.

It's a no-brainer for me.

Replies (16)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

By petersaxton
06th Jan 2017 12:20

How do you work out the numbers?

Thanks (0)
Replying to petersaxton:
RLI
By lionofludesch
06th Jan 2017 12:45

petersaxton wrote:

How do you work out the numbers?

Haha - nice one, Peter.

I'm just speaking of the actual submission process here. Though, in this instance, I could have jotted a few notes down on the back of an envelope.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By mabzden
06th Jan 2017 13:17

Did you get a signed hard copy of the accounts first?

Thanks (0)
Replying to mabzden:
RLI
By lionofludesch
06th Jan 2017 13:25

Of course.

And a minute of the directors' meeting at which they were approved.

Thanks (0)
Replying to lionofludesch:
avatar
By mabzden
06th Jan 2017 13:33

Jolly good.

Just checking.

Thanks (0)
avatar
By the_hoff
06th Jan 2017 13:44

Let us know how you get on when you bill the client.

There's no doubt FRS 105 accounts are short (and therefore easy to rekey) but this is something a client may point out when I hand them my bill.

As accountants we know the work involved in preparing two-page accounts isn't much different to preparing "proper" 10-page accounts. But that fact is probably lost on clients.

If I had a pound for every time a client who only traded for six months expected the bill to be half the normal amount ...

Thanks (0)
Replying to the_hoff:
RLI
By lionofludesch
06th Jan 2017 13:57

Bill the client ?

Sure - it's no different to what it was a year ago. The client gets extra pages in his copy and Companies House gets less. That's been the case over the 43 years I've been in this game.

The client will get a detailed trading account and he'll have analyses of various entries.

Thanks (0)
By Tim Vane
06th Jan 2017 14:24

I'm not sure what commercial software you've used but for me filing to CH is just 3 clicks (and entering the company authentication code if I've not already input it for that client).

Thanks (0)
avatar
By mabzden
06th Jan 2017 14:38

It depends exactly where you start counting, but for me it's a one click process. (More if adding the signature information is included.)

I hereby challenge Companies House to beat one click.

And has the OP been an accountant for 43 years? I always assumed it was longer! ;-)

Thanks (0)
paddle steamer
By DJKL
06th Jan 2017 14:58

TaxCalc is two codes ( My agent auth & password, client individual codes already held within client HUB) then usually a refresh on the submissions panel to ensure has been accepted, however the last step is done en masse for multiple submissions and the software reminds me to check when I open it, so not very onerous.

Just wish LLP accounts lodging functionality was also incorporated.

Anyway better get back to some partnership accounts, at least the tax will be a doddle (10 minutes a pship return) given the accounts production link to the tax software.

Thanks (0)
By ireallyshouldknowthisbut
06th Jan 2017 15:14

For VT it just does it in a couple of clicks, but its good to know you can do it "direct" easily.

I haven't done my first set yet, but need to do one next week for a mortgage application. Does anyone know off hand if the rules for related parties has changed? Not that CH or HMRC seem to give two hoots.

Thanks (0)
Replying to ireallyshouldknowthisbut:
By johngroganjga
06th Jan 2017 15:45

Yes related party transaction rules have changed in FRS102. Now, believe it or not, you only disclose transaction that are not on normal commercial terms! Cue lots of extra discussions with clients that we have never had to have before, and which they are unlikely to be keen to pay for. I can hear them saying "why do we have to pay more when we disclose less?". Why do people change what is not broken?

Thanks (1)
Replying to johngroganjga:
RLI
By lionofludesch
06th Jan 2017 16:01

There's no direct link between disclosure and the work I do.

Clients have to accept that the shareholder accounts, together with any additional extra-statutory management information we produce, represent the work we do. The accounts filed at CH are merely the edited bits you have to tell Joe Public about.

I have to say that I've never had a fee dispute based on CH accounts being on one page (pretty much). When Abbreviated Accounts first came in - 1985 Act, was it ? - back in the day when you did have to do a bit of extra work to edit them down - I don't remember any client saying "no, no, we'll file full accounts and save ourselves £50 (or whatever)". They were all happy to put as little on public record as they could.

Thanks (0)
Replying to lionofludesch:
By johngroganjga
06th Jan 2017 16:37

I think you have completely misunderstood what my post was about.

Thanks (0)
Replying to johngroganjga:
Flag of the Soviet Union
By thevaliant
06th Jan 2017 16:34

I've run into this.

Rightly or wrongly, my partners have decided that dividends to directors aren't on commercial terms. So out go those disclosures......

Thanks (1)
Replying to thevaliant:
By johngroganjga
06th Jan 2017 16:40

You mean the opposite surely?

Thanks (0)