I always invoice the directors by name and put the limited company name after and add terms in the invoice holding the above named directors jointly and severally liable.
Have sued some ex clients in this way, but cannot say if it works, since they did not file a defence.
I can recall a liquidator repudiating a claim I made against some very ex clients, on the basis that I had not performed any services for the director personally (which I had), but in that case figured it wasnt worth the court fees.
I think, but don't know, that suing the directors on the basis of an invoice in their name(s) possibly does work. It also makes you wonder if it is better to always include some personal work in the invoice narrative - e.g. preparing tax return, advising the directors etc.
Just my tuppence worth.
P.S. If you look at credit applications from e.g. Buildbase, they always include a directors guarantee on the signature section.
I think it worth dumping to Excel. In the past we changed tax software that prevented you from accessing the old data when your licence had expired. What I found was that I could read data via notepad, but that was a bit hit and miss and you had to guess which record to look at. So that would lead me back to the Excel dump.
a bit of lateral thinking with the rti submission could surely activate the dd. But, then again, I suppose that is one step closer to HMRC paying the employees from the business bank account - seem to have heard about that somewhere.
...figured the time taken to scan the paperwork or check it was all there would outweigh the possible cost saving.
Also thought that by the time you had looked at the paperwork outbound and checking the results inbound, you may as well have done the work in house. From all the above, it does seem to come down to having good accounts staff.
there is a cost to us in checking these notices - so easy to miss something and find the penalties running or employees of clients not having their salaries taxed correctly.
HMRC have had quite a while to get things in order - plus ca change etc.
AAT is probably worth doing - and at least home studying the material for Level 1. AAT allows exemptions from level 1, but I would suggest it is probably the most useful of all AAT syllabus.
My answers
I got one from Barclays - phoned them up and found out what needed filling in, so cant see why HSBC cannot do the same.
I wrote lots of silly comments on the form to the effect that what sort of government give info to a hostile government overseas.
Subsequently noticed that I hadnt updated something with the bank and wondered if that may have started the fatwa against me.
Chucked the form in the shredder and didnt hear anything more.
Long story short - it may be that e.g. a date or place of birth or other information is missing from the banks records.
I always invoice the directors by name and put the limited company name after and add terms in the invoice holding the above named directors jointly and severally liable.
Have sued some ex clients in this way, but cannot say if it works, since they did not file a defence.
I can recall a liquidator repudiating a claim I made against some very ex clients, on the basis that I had not performed any services for the director personally (which I had), but in that case figured it wasnt worth the court fees.
I think, but don't know, that suing the directors on the basis of an invoice in their name(s) possibly does work. It also makes you wonder if it is better to always include some personal work in the invoice narrative - e.g. preparing tax return, advising the directors etc.
Just my tuppence worth.
P.S. If you look at credit applications from e.g. Buildbase, they always include a directors guarantee on the signature section.
probably Excel
I think it worth dumping to Excel. In the past we changed tax software that prevented you from accessing the old data when your licence had expired. What I found was that I could read data via notepad, but that was a bit hit and miss and you had to guess which record to look at. So that would lead me back to the Excel dump.
HMRC used to close PAYE schemes where no payments were being returned - i.e. a pre rti 'nil' return.
P45 every time - and it is up to the employer to check if the director restarts salary - just like other PAYE compliance.
I guess Companies House
has become a suppository of all sorts.
my character was deformated a long time ago.
is it too much to ask rti to do this
a bit of lateral thinking with the rti submission could surely activate the dd. But, then again, I suppose that is one step closer to HMRC paying the employees from the business bank account - seem to have heard about that somewhere.
looked at it a long time ago..
...figured the time taken to scan the paperwork or check it was all there would outweigh the possible cost saving.
Also thought that by the time you had looked at the paperwork outbound and checking the results inbound, you may as well have done the work in house. From all the above, it does seem to come down to having good accounts staff.
and lawyers etc etc
So we piddle about verifying people we know, banks refuse to open bank accounts for poor people with no fixed address, same old same old...
admin cost
there is a cost to us in checking these notices - so easy to miss something and find the penalties running or employees of clients not having their salaries taxed correctly.
HMRC have had quite a while to get things in order - plus ca change etc.
No harm in it
AAT is probably worth doing - and at least home studying the material for Level 1. AAT allows exemptions from level 1, but I would suggest it is probably the most useful of all AAT syllabus.