Flats. not under HMO or RRO?

[Mike Buckley]

OK just to add extra spice to the arguement. Yes the body corporate is responsible but under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act the senior management of the company can be prosecuted if their activities cause a death due to a gross breach of the duty of care.

They missed with the left but the right snuck in again!

[jokar]

It is the same with a rgeistered partnership or any employer.  The organisation that employs the people is subject to the Notice, not a named individual.  A Company Secretary handles correspondence form people and deals with that on behalf of a Company.  There is out there as well a company of Company Secretaries.  Be careful with Tesco though, they may be a Plc but thye trade under different guises and therfore you have to pick the correct Company ie Tesco Stores ro tesco Finance.  These are regulatory Financial ideals that FRS have to get around and ensure thhey issue the Notice correctly.

[PhilB]

OK just to add extra spice to the arguement. Yes the body corporate is responsible but under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act the senior management of the company can be prosecuted if their activities cause a death due to a gross breach of the duty of care.

They missed with the left but the right snuck in again!

You can prosecute the individual using the Order if that is the appropraite course of action 32( for senior manager or 32(10) for other individuals.

Sorry for hijacking your post Stewbow.

[FSO]

Im sorry Phil I still do not understand where you are coming from.

A notice is surely served on the responsible person as somebody has to be culpable. Ultimately this would be a person with ultimate financial control over a premises.

Surely is why we have access to companies house records in order to indentify that person.

If you wanted to prosecute under the RRO, where potentially somebody could serve a custodial sentence, this prosecution has to be personified.

Am I missing your point?

Jay

[PhilB]

Im sorry Phil I still do not understand where you are coming from.

A notice is surely served on the responsible person as somebody has to be culpable. Ultimately this would be a person with ultimate financial control over a premises.

Surely is why we have access to companies house records in order to indentify that person.

If you wanted to prosecute under the RRO, where potentially somebody could serve a custodial sentence, this prosecution has to be personified.

Am I missing your point?

Jay

No the responsible person is "the body corporate" i.e. the company. You would take the company to Court. If you felt that the company's failings were the result of the failings on a particular individual, that person, as well as the company could be prosecuted and the individual could receive a custodial sentence.

But, the responsible person, as defined in article 3 is the employer, the employer is the body corporate, not the company secretary.

[FSO]

I think you are saying the same thing as me, the only difference is we will personify the resposible person or body.

I fully agree that notice will not be served on the company secretary. However there is ALWAYS somebody responsible.

[PhilB]

I think you are saying the same thing as me, the only difference is we will personify the resposible person or body.

I fully agree that notice will not be served on the company secretary. However there is ALWAYS somebody responsible.

No sorry FSO I'm not saying the same as you, there is no need to personify anyone, the company can be served with a notice, the company can be prosecuted. Perhaps we should start a new thread on this.

[FSO]

Thats not the definition of the responsible person though, to where a notice would be served.

[Midland Retty]

Thats not the definition of the responsible person though, to where a notice would be served.

The company secretary is not a responsible person.

If it is a limited company all notices and enforcement action will be taken against "bodies corporate"

The correspondance relating to bodies corporate is ADDRESSED to the company secretary so that it lands on his or her desk - but it wouldn't necessarily be the company secretary in the dock if something went to court.

The Company Secretary ensures that an organisation complies with relevant legislation and regulation, and keeps board members informed of their legal responsibilities.

Company Secretaries are the company’s named representative on legal documents, and it is their responsibility to ensure that the company and its directors operate within the law.

[PhilB]

Spot on Retty

[FSO]

Thats not the definition of the responsible person though, to where a notice would be served.

The company secretary is not a responsible person.

If it is a limited company all notices and enforcement action will be taken against "bodies corporate"

The correspondance relating to bodies corporate is ADDRESSED to the company secretary so that it lands on his or her desk - but it wouldn't necessarily be the company secretary in the dock if something went to court.

The Company Secretary ensures that an organisation complies with relevant legislation and regulation, and keeps board members informed of their legal responsibilities.

Company Secretaries are the company’s named representative on legal documents, and it is their responsibility to ensure that the company and its directors operate within the law.

Yes I totally agree, however you cannot take a piece of paper to court!

[wee brian]

Of course you can

[Clevelandfire]

I do it all the time