Defendant
Joseph Edson ANGEL
Date of birth 1967-10-31
Address 10 Pear Tree Close, Slough, SL1 5EZ
Postcode SL1 5EZ
Case summary
Reference 2500558829
Platform libra
Source
Magistrates
Court City of London Magistrates' Court
First listed 2025-09-17
Latest listing 2025-09-17
Force matching
Prosecuting force City of London Police
Defendant area Thames Valley Police
Out of area — forces differ
URN track Libra Case Number (year 25, serial 00558829) - no force code embedded (0.00)
Text track court 'City of London Magistrates' Court' is in the City of London Police area (0.45)
Postcode track postcode SL1 5EZ -> Thames Valley Police (0.95)
Offence
Between 11/01/2024 and 25/04/2025 at within CCC were an officer, namely Director of a company to which Part 21A of the Companies Act 2006 applied, namely RACTA Services Ltd and who was in default in that the company failed to keep a register of people with significant control over the company with required particulars of any individual with significant control over the company who was 'registrable
Timeline (1 event)
2025-09-17
list
City of London Magistrates' Court
Between 11/01/2024 and 25/04/2025 at within CCC were an officer, namely Director of a company to which Part 21A of the Companies Act 2006 applied, namely RACTA Services Ltd and who was in default in that the company failed to keep a register of people with significant control over the company with required particulars of any individual with significant control over the company who was 'registrable' in relation to the company, being entered in the register before the end of the period of 14 days
Between 31/05/2024 and 25/04/2025 at within CCC, were an officer, namely Director of a company, namely RACTA Services Ltd and who was in default in that the company refused an inspection without charge of its PSC register. Contrary to sections 790Q(1) and 790Q(2) of the Companies Act 2006. Between 31/05/2024 and 25/04/2025 at within CCC the defendant, was an officer, namely Director of a company, namely RACTA Services Ltd and who was in default in that the company refused an inspection without c