UK Offence Report

Offence for failure to provide information

regulation 22(1) of The Registrar (Identity Verification and Authorised Corporate Service Providers) Regulations 2025

This offence was read from the text as made, and no revised version was available, so a later revocation could not be ruled out. Check the current text at legislation.gov.uk.

What the provision says

1 It is an offence for

a person to fail, without reasonable excuse, to comply with regulation

19 or 21.

Text as made, from legislation.gov.uk. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.

Who it binds, and what has to be proved

Binds
a person
Conduct
breaching the provision
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

The prosecution must prove that the conduct happened. This is a strict liability offence as drafted: the provision uses no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence, so there is no need to show that a person meant to do it, knew about it, or was careless.

Intention, knowledge and carelessness are irrelevant to guilt. They may still matter a great deal to sentence.

“Without reasonable excuse” here is an element of the offence rather than a defence, so its absence is for the prosecution to prove (R v Charles [2009] EWCA Crim 1570).

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

1 It is an offence for a person to fail, without reasonable excuse, to comply with regulation 19 or 21.

What would breach regulation 22(1)?

These are illustrations, not law. They are generated from the provision’s own words to show the shape of the offence. Whether any particular conduct is caught depends on the full text, on any amendment since, and on the facts.

  1. On these words it is an offence to fail, without reasonable excuse, to comply with regulation 19 or 21.
  2. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Registrar (Identity Verification and Authorised Corporate Service Providers) Regulations 2025.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
Unlimited
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
6 months
Maximum prison (on indictment)
1 year

level 5 is unlimited in England and Wales for offences committed on or after 12 March 2015 (LASPO 2012 s.85, S.I. 2015/664); imprisonment expressed as the general limit in a magistrates' court (Sentencing Act 2020 s.224(1A)); 12 months as at the latest change. Note the limit is keyed to the date of conviction, while the standard scale is keyed to the date of the offence, so a single date is an approximation here; imprisonment expressed as the general limit in a magistrates' court (Sentencing Act 2020 s.224(1A)); 12 months as at the latest change. Note the limit is keyed to the date of conviction, while the standard scale is keyed to the date of the offence, so a single date is an approximation here.

Sentencing

Offences of this kind are usually sentenced under the guidelines below. This is a mapping by subject, not a finding about this provision, and the links go to a search of the Sentencing Council’s own site.

Prosecution figures

No published per-offence figure was found for this provision, and it could not be matched to a Ministry of Justice offence code. Offences created by statutory instrument very largely do not have one. Absence of a figure is not evidence that the offence is unused.

Status and lifecycle

Current status
Status not determined
Made
20 January 2025
In force from
Not determined
Extent
Not stated

How this was established: read from the text as made; no revised version available, so later revocation could not be ruled out.

What the instrument is for

(This note is not part of the Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations make provision about identity verification, authorised corporate service providers (“ACSPs”, defined in section 1098A of the Companies Act 2006 (“the 2006 Act”)) and unique identifiers (defined in section 1082 of the 2006 Act). Part 2 makes provision for and in connection with verification or reverification of an individual’s identity in accordance with section 1110A of the 2006 Act. Under section 1110A(1) of the 2006 Act, the individual’s identity is verified for the purposes of the 2006 Act if the individual’s identity has been verified by the registrar in accordance with regulations made under section 1110B of the 2006 Act or a “verification statement” in respect of the individual has been delivered to the registrar by an ACSP, and the individual has not since then ceased to be an individual whose identity is verified by virtue of regulations under section 1110A(4) of the 2006 Act. A verification statement is defined in section 1110A(2) of the 2006 Act as a statement by an ACSP confirming that it has verified an individual’s identity in accordance with regulations under section 1110B of the 2006 Act. This Part sets out the procedure for verifying or reverifying an individual’s identity: a Chapter 2 confers a power on the registrar to impose additional requirements by registrar’s rules; b Chapter 3 sets out the requirements an individual must comply with to successfully have their identity verified or reverified by the registrar and the procedure that the registrar must follow; c Chapter 4 provides for conditions that must be met for an ACSP to deliver a verification statement or reverification statement to the registrar, specifies the necessary contents of verification statements and prescribes additional information to be delivered with them; d Chapter 5 provides for circumstances in which someone ceases to be an individual whose identity is verified and sets out the procedure for reverifying an individual’s identity; e Chapter 6 makes provision about the records that a person who is or has been an ACSP is required to keep in connection with the verification or reverification of an individual’s identity and contains an offence for failure to comply with the record-keeping duty. Part 3 makes provision concerning ACSPs. Chapter 1 provides for circumstances in which a person ceases to be an ACSP and sets out the procedure for issuing notices suspending and terminating an ACSP’s status. Chapter 2 imposes duties on ACSPs to provide the registrar with information and update required information delivered under section 1098C of the 2006 Act, backed by criminal offences. Part 4 sets out the procedure for allocation and discontinuation of unique identifiers for verified individuals and ACSPs. It also requires delivery of a statement about an allocation of a unique identifier to an ACSP with the application to become an ACSP made under section 1098B of the 2006 Act. Part 5 specifies when notices given under these Regulations are validly sent or supplied to individuals and ACSPs. Part 6 makes provision requiring the Secretary of State to review the operation and effect of these Regulations and publish a report within 5 years after they come fully into force and within every 5 years after that. Following a review it will fall to the Secretary of State to consider whether these Regulations should remain as they are, or be revoked or be amended. A further instrument would be needed to revoke these Regulations or to amend them. A full impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business, the voluntary sector and the public sector is available and is published with the Explanatory Memorandum alongside this instrument. A hard copy may be obtained from the Department for Business and Trade, Old Admiralty Building, London SW1A 2DY.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

Other offences in the same instrument

How this was identified as an offence

Everything above rests on the judgement that this provision creates a criminal offence, rather than mentioning one. That judgement is made by rule, from the words of the provision, and this is the rule that made it — with a confidence of 0.90.

Basis
the provision says “it is an offence”; the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.90 of 1.00

A provision that states a penalty for an offence created elsewhere can read very like one that creates an offence, and the rules can mistake the one for the other. If the text quoted above sets a penalty for something made an offence by another provision, treat the classification on this page with that in mind, and read the instrument.

Check the source