To record or not to record

[nearlythere]

Views please.
Fred and Wilma Flintstone jointly own a nursing home trading as Flintstone Nursing Home Inc and employs 19 staff. Fred also has a smaller business he runs himself and has 1 employee. Does Fred, as himself, employ more than 4 persons for the purposes of having to record the Assessment for his smaller business?

[AnthonyB]

Does his smaller business require a license under an enactment to operate?

[nearlythere]

Does his smaller business require a license under an enactment to operate?

Lets say no.

[Midland Retty]

Hi NT

I can answer this from a RR(FS)O viewpoint.

You treat each business interest seperately

So with Fred's first business (the care home) he would need to record the findings.

His other business is not connected with the care home and he only employs four, so assuming there are no licenses made under enactment is in force to run that business, or an alterations notice is not in force then he doesn't have to record the findings

You go for the aggregate number of employees in same business, but do notclub together employees from other business intrests belonging to the same RP if that makes sense

[CivvyFSO]

There is nothing that says that if an alterations notice is in force that he has to record the findings......

[Civvy waits patiently for a bite]

Anyway, to progress NT's point, if in a shop called "Golf Balls For Sale" I employ 3 people to sell golf balls for me, and in a different shop called "We Buy Golf Balls" I employ 3 people to buy golf balls for me, surely I quite truly employ 6 people?

Now if I start a limited company called "We Have More Balls Than You Ltd" which employs 4 people, then I still only employ 6, but the company I have created employs 4.

It has been made clear that the requirement to record is based on the number of persons the business entity employs, so while being "Civvyfso trading as 'whatever' ", I am the entity, and it could be argued that the RRFSO states clearly that I have to record the findings. (I am the employer, and I do employ 5 or more)

You can push the scenario a little further and have all the shops next door to each other. Are we bothered then about the total number of employees? What if I put an intercommunicating door between them so I can get from on to another quicker? What if I bring the buying and selling employees into the same building?

All that being said, it is a point which I hope nobody ever spends any money trying to prove one way or another as it would be a pointless waste of money or time. It's best practice to record, simply get it done and stop being such a ****.

[Mike Buckley]

Yes, I agree record everything. However I can see the legal eagles looking for another pay day arguing this one.

Anyway think of the fun you can have taking yourself to court in the case of "Civvyfso trading as whatever" v Civvyfso MD of "We Have More Balls Than You Ltd."

[Midland Retty]

Civvy is "We Talk More Balls Than You Plc" also one of yours? 

If I own Midland Retty Cattle Farms Ltd and employ 3 people
then I own Midland Retty Heavy Industries producing engine component and employ 2 people then I clearly employ 5 people on aggregate. But those businesses are totally unconnected and thus I don't feel you can "club them together"

But as already said you may as well just record everything anyway.

[kurnal]

Any limited company is an individual body corporate and owned by the shareholders. The Directors are employees.

So it does not matter how many companies you are the director of each comany, as an employer, is considered in its own right.

Thats absolutely clear and beyond any doubt or argument. (I think.)

[CivvyFSO]

I agree Kurnal.

Midland Retty Cattle Farms Ltd are the employer in one case, but since Midland Retty Heavy industries do not seem to be a limited company then the status of employer would fall to Midland as a person. In the case of a limited company, the company is essentially seen as a person which action can be taken against. For us to serve a notice on the limited company the notice would be served on the company, but in the other case the notice would be served on "Midland Retty".

"We Talk More Balls Than You PLC" is clearly a rival company... Set up in the Midlands area I suspect. 

[SamFIRT]

"We Talk More Balls Than You Plc"

We Have More Balls Than You Ltd

...club them together...

Bad pun or am I looking too deeply ........In the rough 

[CivvyFSO]

Par for the course I guess.

[Clevelandfire 3]

I agree Kurnal.

Midland Retty Cattle Farms Ltd are the employer in one case, but since Midland Retty Heavy industries do not seem to be a limited company then the status of employer would fall to Midland as a person. In the case of a limited company, the company is essentially seen as a person which action can be taken against. For us to serve a notice on the limited company the notice would be served on the company, but in the other case the notice would be served on "Midland Retty".

"We Talk More Balls Than You PLC" is clearly a rival company... Set up in the Midlands area I suspect. 

Midland Rotweiller Heavy Industries only employs 2 people Civvy therefore you cant do him. Drop ball scenario. foul. one stroke. if you dont mind.

[Tom W]

This may seem a stupid question but what if Piglet Ltd owns lots of stores in Schottland and one in England. Its lead authority is Scottish but there is a problem with its English store. Would the owner be tried under Scottish or English regs?

Im guessing it is a stupid question and of course it would be under English but how would that work? Would the Scots extradite them?! 

[CivvyFSO]

Midland Rotweiller Heavy Industries only employs 2 people Civvy therefore you cant do him. Drop ball scenario. foul. one stroke. if you dont mind.

What has the number of employees got to do with whether we can serve a notice or not? The only point I am making with the notice scenario is who/what is legally seen as the employer/RP.

In the Heavy Industries example, any notice would be served on Midland as a person. As Midland is the employer in this case.
In the Cattle Farms Ltd example, any notice would be served on the company. As the company is the employer in this case.

These are two specific and legally separate employers.

[Midland Retty]

I will concede to Civvy's explanation of the legalities behind this.

If both my companies are limited companies they are legally separate.

If they aren't legally seperate then the total number of employees from each undertaking can be taken in aggregate.

Sounds fair... I knew I was half right(ish)... sort of.... perhaps...

Well done Civvy - a well deserved drink at the 19th Hole awaits you.