Review Time
Very disappointed with my recent experience dealing with Companies House.
An incorrect date of birth was recorded on my company details, and despite this being something that should be easily verified against official ID, the process to correct it has been slow and unnecessarily complicated.
I’ve been required to wait for physical forms to be posted out rather than being able to resolve the issue digitally. For what is a straightforward correction, this feels outdated and inefficient.
What’s most concerning is that incorrect information was accepted onto the register in the first place, yet correcting it is significantly more difficult than submitting it. That imbalance raises real questions about how the system operates in practice.
This has also had knock-on effects on filing deadlines, creating additional pressure despite acting promptly to resolve the issue.
I would expect a modern, digital-first approach—particularly for identity-related corrections that could be verified quickly using existing records.
At the moment, the process does not reflect that standard.
Very disappointed with my recent experience dealing with Companies House.An incorrect date of birth was recorded on my company details, and despite this being something that should be easily verified against official ID, the process to correct it has been slow and unnecessarily complicated.I’ve been required to wait for physical forms to be posted out rather than being able to resolve the issue digitally. For what is a straightforward correction, this feels outdated and inefficient.What’s most concerning is that incorrect information was accepted onto the register in the first place, yet correcting it is significantly more difficult than submitting it. That imbalance raises real questions about how the system operates in practice.This has also had knock-on effects on filing deadlines, creating additional pressure despite acting promptly to resolve the issue.I would expect a modern, digital-first approach—particularly for identity-related corrections that could be verified quickly using existing records.At the moment, the process does not reflect that standard.
I genuinely struggle to see the value in Companies House beyond being a compulsory filing system that charges you for using it. The recent identity verification process was particularly poor - confusing, repetitive, and clearly not ready for release. I spent over a week stuck in a loop, repeatedly trying to complete verification while dealing with a system that felt buggy and untested. Support was no help at all, consisting mainly of generic, copy-and-paste responses that didn’t address the actual issues.Having finally got through that ordeal, I then needed to file my confirmation statement - something I’ve done without issue for years using the previous WebFiling system. Unfortunately, the new system is a significant step backwards. What used to be straightforward became time-consuming and stressful, ultimately costing £50 and a considerable amount of time over the Easter weekend and the following 10 days or so.The most frustrating part is the lack of meaningful support. Queries were misunderstood, responses were irrelevant, and instead of resolving issues, I was repeatedly warned about penalties for late filing—despite the problems clearly being caused by the system itself.It’s hard to understand why a working system was replaced with one that is more complicated and less reliable. Basic expectations such as proper testing before rollout and adequately trained support staff don’t seem unreasonable.At the moment, the experience feels unnecessarily difficult and poorly managed.
The Companies House verification process through GOV.UK is dysfunctional. If the name recorded for director at Companies Hoise is not exactly as in the passport, driving licence or BRP then it is rejected and the person locked out. This may be due to an apostrophe of a S/O that is in the documens but not included at Companies House. One is then locked out and cannot use the Post Office in-person option. The GOV.UK helpline is of no help. They say they can only help if one uses Google Chrome or Firefpox as browsers and not Microsoft Edge. I do not wish to use the former two as they have conditions and disruptions that I do not like. Companies House is not able to offer a soluyion other than suggesting using ACPS, which costs. They do not provide a link on the verification page to list and do not inform anything about cost. There is nothing to ensure that after paying the same name maytch problem will not occur
The verification process is impossible for some, yet companies house don't care. They tell you that your only option is to use an ACSP which back in November might have cost each director £25. Now - due to the fact that the verification process is failing - this can cost upwards of £100 per director. If they had "Verified" their own processes prior to implementation, companies house would not now be passing on erroneous costs to cash strapped dormant companies directors. It's an absolute disgrace that they take no responsibility for their poor judgement in enforcing this process on us. Shame on you, Companies House.
Having just tried to verify and and do a confirmation statement, I can concur with literally every other reviewer on here. Ridiculous, confusing and non performant. Companies house, it literally sucks balls as a process.
This is the worst front end interface on any iy system ever. Confusing, bloated, misleading and overcomplicated. It took 2 days to verify and submit a confirmation statement which used to take 10 minutes as a shuttle return. The government clearly is driving less competant IT users to suicide or massive penalties for late submission. We are still waiting for acceptance of the return, despite no changes having been made from last year.
I recently went through the online incorporation process and encountered a persistent "Service Unavailable" error when entering my co-founder's residential address. I tried five times over several hours with no success. The Companies House status page showed everything as normal, with no warning anywhere in the application journey that this feature was broken.With no other option to progress, I used an office address as a placeholder — fully intending to correct it on approval. The next day my application was rejected for using a non-residential address.When I called Companies House, the agent confirmed they were already aware of the bug. Yet there was no warning shown to users, and no reasonable fix was offered. The two options I was given were: pay 25% more to apply by post (over a four-day Easter bank holiday weekend), or incorporate without my co-founder and add them later – a messy workaround for something that was entirely their system's fault.About 30 minutes after the call, I tried again and it worked – the bug had been silently fixed. The agent had no knowledge of this.The core issue isn't just the bug – it's that a critical, known failure had no user-facing notice, and the resolution offered was entirely unreasonable. For a government service that founders depend on for something as important as company formation, this is simply not good enough.I have filed a formal complaint and hope this review helps other founders know what to watch out for.
The whole id verification process demonstrates the grossest incompetence on the part of those responsible. What could have been a straightforward process was made ridiculously complex and confusing, especially the requirement for doing everything multiple times, even though CH knows it is the same person. Why on earth a limited 14 day window, why change the login process at the same time, why a dozen other stupid things?Then of course it turns out that the supposedly secure storage of data is wide open to the internet for months.
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
a1recruiting.org
logisticsff.com
trinitylogistics.com
totalcardvisa.com
mahmoudkelany.com
designcosmics.com
partnerplatform.bol.com
qinprinting.com
yell.com
ecomknockout.com