Getting a company struck off

Should I file a DS01 or deliberately not file the confirmation statement?

Didn't find your answer?

Whenever I need to get a company struck off, I file a DS01. I have a company that needs striking off in a couple of weeks as soon as the directors have closed the bank account. The company is due to file its confirmation statement, deadline 8 April. I've always filed confirmation statements on time and understand late confirmation statement can result in strike off. As we want to strike this company off in a couple of weeks anyway, I am wondering about not filing a confirmation statement and let the company get struck off rather than filing a confirmation statement now followed by the DS01 in a few weeks. What would other AWebbers do in these circumstances?

Replies (17)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By taxdigital
25th Mar 2024 10:06

The feather touch enforcement of company law notwithstanding, failing to file a confirmation statement within 14 days is a criminal offence (s.853L CA 2006). Regardless of whether that provision is enforced or not, a professional will not knowingly advise a client to commit an offence.

Thanks (4)
Replying to taxdigital:
Morph
By kevinringer
25th Mar 2024 10:23

Good point taxdigital. I'll get the confirmation statement filed now. Thanks for your help.

Thanks (1)
avatar
By zebaa
25th Mar 2024 11:17

The other route is not to have directors of course. If the directors resign then there is no one to file the confirmation statement, no one to commit the offence referred to by tax digital. But, that said, I think filing both confirmation statement and DS01 is the correct way to achieve your aim. .

Thanks (3)
avatar
By carnmores
25th Mar 2024 12:39

yes i think cleanest way is file CS & then DS01, it preserves the integrity of the company

Thanks (3)
avatar
By Postingcomments
25th Mar 2024 14:17

You're considering this route for what reason? To save a tiny amount of money in filing fees? £8 strike off fee and £13 ACS fee

Yes, that's well worth bringing the profession into disrepute, isn't it?

I despair sometimes with some of you. I really do.

Thanks (4)
Replying to Postingcomments:
avatar
By carnmores
25th Mar 2024 17:44

boo to that

Thanks (1)
Lisa Thomas
By Lisa Thomas - Insolvency Practitioner
25th Mar 2024 15:18

Many people purposely don't file DS01's when their company is insolvent and they hope Companies House will strike it off for them, rather than give proper notice to creditors, or liquidate.

But I can't see why you would purposely not file for a solvent company.

Is the company in question solvent?

Thanks (2)
Replying to Insolvency Practitioner:
Morph
By kevinringer
25th Mar 2024 15:41

The company is solvent. I was asking as it seems to get 2 jobs done together. As a result of taxdigital's response I've now filed the confirmation statement and will file the DS01 soon.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Insolvency Practitioner:
avatar
By johnthegood
26th Mar 2024 08:26

Insolvency Practitioner wrote:

But I can't see why you would purposely not file for a solvent company.

Because it saves £21 - might not go far these days but every little helps

Thanks (0)
Sandman
By Mr Sandman
27th Mar 2024 11:01

My client has ceased trading, so the Director wants the company struck off.
But an ex employee is falsely claiming compensation for a work accident.
Therefore the DS01 cannot be submitted.
So the director has no choice but to resign, & leave the Confirmation Statement outstanding. Companies House should then strike off.

Thanks (0)
Replying to Mr Sandman:
avatar
By Arcadia
27th Mar 2024 13:27

The director does have another option, the correct one, which is to seek the advice of an Insolvency Practitioner. The complainant may be able to have the company reinstated on the register. A striking off is not necessarily the end of the matter.

Thanks (3)
Replying to Arcadia:
avatar
By zebaa
27th Mar 2024 15:25

An insolvency practitioner is a none starter if the company has no assets and no one is willing to pay. But consider; if the company was reinstated what good would that do ? It would have no directors, nor would anyone be likely to come forward. It would then be dissolved after a few months for having no directors. The instigator ( of reinstatement ) would simply be throwing good money after bad.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Arcadia:
avatar
By Roland195
27th Mar 2024 16:46

But assuming the company has ceased to trade and currently insolvent with no means to pay for an Insolvency Practitioner, what do you suppose should happen here?

Thanks (1)
Replying to Mr Sandman:
paddle steamer
By DJKL
27th Mar 2024 15:40

What about the ER liability insurance policy and dealing with the insurance company and the brokers re the pregnant claim, who is going to do that if no directors.

One of the reasons why employers need to either retain/or have on the register details of past insurers is to ensure claims can be settled.

You say an false accident claim, how do you or he know it is false before it is tested? Is this your expertise or your client's?

We had a trip claim re an individual on cobbled parking we own, notwithstanding chains , signs saying private parking, never invited on to land etc m the claim was settled, I had initially thought it spurious but the loss adjuster cited

Occupiers’ Liability (Scotland) Act 1960

And a £10k claim was settled.

The catch is unless an expert re H & S at work you likely do not know what you do not know so are not really competent to declare a claim spurious.

Thanks (3)
Replying to DJKL:
avatar
By Roland195
27th Mar 2024 16:48

Assuming the company had liability insurance, there is the possibility that the company will be restored by court order to access it.

The chances are that the first thing the director will know about it is when he receives late filing demands from Companies House for a company dissolved years ago.

Thanks (2)
Replying to Roland195:
paddle steamer
By DJKL
28th Mar 2024 00:33

Of course if there is no ER cover and company was an employer things get bleaker given carrying such insurance was, when an employer ,I believe a legal requirement.

Thanks (1)
Replying to Roland195:
avatar
By Paul Crowley
28th Mar 2024 02:59

Interestingly a former dubious client had his company reinstated by HMRC. The company had used a loan scheme. I only became aware as the company was reinstated on my agent corporation tax portal. A complete waste of time and money by HMRC unless they can look through the company to the director. I really hope they can. It would make my day.

Thanks (0)