Warning to Company Directors - Identity Theft

[csgohan4]

Just a heads up to the experiance I have recently had unfortunately.

Received two debit cards yesterday from two seperate banks, I'm like WTF? I never ordered these. Went to their fraud department of both banks who gladly cancelled the cards and removed the credit footprintfrom my credit report.They also input my details onto a system called CIFAS so next thime anyone tries to apply for a card in my name they need a passport/ driving license to apply for cards in future.

It transpires the applications of both of those cards did not contain any of my current accounts as I feared someone was phishing in my physical letter box, however they just put in my name, address AND DOB, which it transpires is freely available on Companies house as I am a company director too.

Berated Companies house to no avail as they can't hide any details due to the current legislation, which absolute Bull.

I am not a happy bunny nevertheless, the stress this caused me in the last 24 hours. Registered for a credit checkand it transpires they tried to apply for another credit card with another company, OMG, so rinse and repeat, cancel and they contacted the CIFAS to investigate.

In summary frustrating and this will not end unless Companies house do something about the Data being displayed in public.

[herulach]

Data on company directors has always been in the public domain, just like accounts are. That isn't going to change.

[OilSheikh]

Didn't know about the Date of Birth bit.

[csgohan4]

really stupid way to reveal everything!, why do they need to have your DOB on it?

article here sums it up

[herulach]

Sorry submitted my first comment half finished. I think the logic is that you need to be able to determine with a reasonable degree of accuracy who it is running a company. The issue here is more with the ccard companies placing ease over security.

[MrComputerSaint]

That is worrying! I will be starting my own business in the future.

Can we write to our MP's perhaps to get the legislation changed?

[RobbieRoy]

It's really a matter of a limited company being a legal entity in its own right, which means that anyone with controlling responsibility needs to be publicly known. Also, many small private companies are legally established as 'public limited companies'. As the name shows, they are public and benefit from certain legislative and financial benefits but all their shareholders names are legally in the public realm.

This sort of legislation, in the Companies Act 2006 has developed over centuries, starting with The Royal Exchange and London Assurance Corporation Act 1719 and so any argument to change it in order to keep director's details secret would need to be very strong.

On the other hand, making director's details public is also aimed to limit corporate fraud (for reason far too boring to go into here!), and so, as usual, it should be about a balancing of competing interests.

[csgohan4]

It's really a matter of a limited company being a legal entity in its own right, which means that anyone with controlling responsibility needs to be publicly known. Also, many small private companies are legally established as 'public limited companies'. As the name shows, they are public and benefit from certain legislative and financial benefits but all their shareholders names are legally in the public realm.

This sort of legislation, in the Companies Act 2006 has developed over centuries, starting with The Royal Exchange and London Assurance Corporation Act 1719 and so any argument to change it in order to keep director's details secret would need to be very strong.

On the other hand, making director's details public is also aimed to limit corporate fraud (for reason far too boring to go into here!), and so, as usual, it should be about a balancing of competing interests.

But surely security and making sure the company is truthful in their declaration lies with Companies house and the government. Instead forces the public domain of not some but ALL information. I can understand the display of their name, but their DOB ?? the two key information people need to open a bank account. Really silly IMHO

If they are unwilling to do this, everyone should be registered for free with CIFAS as mandatory as it is stressful to know that some numpty has applied for >3 credit cards in your name and it was blind luck I picked them up in the mail box.

[Lucio]

My arguement would be with the issuing bank, clearly their checks are insufficient to prevent fraud, and feature loopholes which are being exploited by criminals.

For example, they've either failed to recognise a fake, or have not checked for an official goverment ID matching the details given, have failed to correctly match the declared ethnicity to the person's accent. and similiar. If you want to focus your energies in a practical way, start after the issuing bank and challenge them on this fraud.

[MrComputerSaint]

If the legislation can't be changed, or is difficult to be changed to hide at the least the DOB on the CH website then the banks should be forced to have better security checks, so a driving license, passport shown, photo taken of the person applying.

I suppose it can all teach us to make sure our letter boxes can't be tampered with also.

[jim]

But surely security and making sure the company is truthful in their declaration lies with Companies house and the government. Instead forces the public domain of not some but ALL information. I can understand the display of their name, but their DOB ?? the two key information people need to open a bank account. Really silly IMHO

Not saying you're wrong about the need to hide information, but name alone is clearly insufficient. Knowing that "Matthew Smith" owns a company is completely useless information - a DOB and name combined is far more accurate.

[dave87]

Directors can put their Company's Registered Office as their service address (for small companies this is often their accountants/lawyers), which is the one that appears on the public record. If they do so, they still have to provide their private residential address to Companies House, but that isn't shown on the public record. If you are currently appointed a director of a company, it is a five minute job to change the particulars held by Companies House.

[PlayerAsleep]

Its good to have that information public. Its very minimal though, often out of date address information.

[Top_gun]

really stupid way to reveal everything!, why do they need to have your DOB on it?

article here sums it up

Changing a long standing law based on a Daily Mail article illustrates a knee jerk reaction to law making and unsubstantiated evidence base. It's sad Csgohan4 was a victim of fraud but he has no hard evidence that fraudsters obtained his details from Companies House at all. It's just mere speculation. Many of our details, included DOB, are littered everywhere on commercial and public database in the UK and the rest of the world. Csgohan4's details could have come from another source.

Just how many of the UK's directors actually care how about our privacy when data is a valuable commodity, I wonder?