Genuine question for the legal experts out there, please.

[swee'pea99]

Sounds odd to me. I had to jump through a similar certification bunch of hoops with my (business) bank recently, but I did it all online, and free, sending them scanned copies of driving licenses, utility bills, letters from the Inland Revenue & the like. Bit of a faff, but zero cost. If that's good enough to cover money laundering type stuff between a Ltd company & HSBC, why can't the same work between a charity and whoever? Sounds like solicitors making themselves a few easy quid to me.

 

[rvw]

The official guidance is here and it doesn't specify how the check must be carried out: the electoral roll is mentioned and I know from personal experience that it's sufficient for some, very large, organisations. Perhaps relevantly, the one I know of is CCLA, which deals only in charities and other not-for-profit groups so maybe that's why they can be more flexible. It also does not specify who can certify documents.

That must therefore be an internal requirement of the investment advisors, but they are the ones with a lot to lose if they take on dodgy clients. My guess (and it is only a guess) is that they want someone who exists on some kind of official list, who can therefore be found if required and who themselves can be sanctioned if they provide a false statement.

I have never had anyone charge me for certifying documents, though - that does seem to be a bit of a cheek. Nor have I had to produce live bodies as well as certified documents - it's always been one or the other. (A charity of which I am no longer a Trustee at one point had to do this exercise for four institutions, with four signatories each time, but we just assembled a big package of documents for each institution and posted them off.)

It would be worth pushing the investment advisors to see if they need the physical people: if not, that at least takes out the diary pressure. That also means that each Trustee could trawl their mates for someone of suitable professional standing, rather than enriching your solicitors.

 

[byegad]

As I have one of the required professional qualifications on the passport verification list I used to sign passport photos for applications by friends. As my hand writing has always dire and is getting worse with arthritis, my last verification caused the authorities to double check an application. I guess they couldn't believe anyone with my qualifications could write so badly.

 

[spen666]

Sounds odd to me. I had to jump through a similar certification bunch of hoops with my (business) bank recently, but I did it all online, and free, sending them scanned copies of driving licenses, utility bills, letters from the Inland Revenue & the like. Bit of a faff, but zero cost. If that's good enough to cover money laundering type stuff between a Ltd company & HSBC, why can't the same work between a charity and whoever? Sounds like solicitors making themselves a few easy quid to me.

Its got nothing to do with solicitors. Its a matter between the investment advisors and their clients.

There is no need to involve a solicitor and no reason therefore to pay them.

If you want to instruct a solicitor to certify your documents, then said person is entitled to be paid for their time.

 

[night cycler]

Bite the bullet with the cost, as much as it is resented. Go the solicitor route.

Get the certification done for your own docs only.

Then inform the other two guys you need their certified documents by xyz date deadline.

Inform them they will be reimbursed.

Stop and smell the roses.

 

[kynikos]

They all have their own requirements - when my other half went to see a solicitor to release some money (to her) she took the usual passport and recent bill. Solicitor didn't want to see them but did want her to swear who she was with one hand on a bible. "I'm not religious" said the Mrs. "Doesn't matter" says the solicitor and the deed was duly done and the money paid over.

 

[irw]

When i joined the Feds I suddenly had a queue of people at my door demanding I sign this, that or the other for them. ...i let it be known that i charge £50 a time....

You want to be careful- the newspapers would have a field day with a quote like that!

 

[nickyboy]

Standard money laundering KYC. I get this all the time so whenever I'm meeting someone who can certify docs then I'll ask them to certify mine while we're meeting about something else

Occasionally I get caught out though and need to pay. The Post Office are generally the cheapest document certifiers

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Also ask how they are protecting your personal data unless they do not get to keep it. After all ID theft would be easy with the stuff mentioned.

 

[Houthakker]

Standard money laundering KYC. I get this all the time so whenever I'm meeting someone who can certify docs then I'll ask them to certify mine while we're meeting about something else

Occasionally I get caught out though and need to pay. The Post Office are generally the cheapest document certifiers

Some organisations won't accept the post office system as it only certifies thats its seen the original documents, not that any photos on those docs actually bear a likeness to the indivduals that presented them,

 

[Drago]

You want to be careful- the newspapers would have a field day with a quote like that!

Thats typically what GPs and other professionals charge, if not more, and they're entitled to do so. I had no actual intention of charging, I just didn't want to sign the forms for people I barely knew who were using me as a means to try and avoid having to pay their GP, solicitor, accountant etc to sign them.

 

[Arjimlad]

I am a Trustee for two Charities.
Excuse the lengthy back story on this before I get to the question.
Our investment advisors for the smaller of the two Charities is asking me to submit two certified ID documents for each of three authorisers (one is me) on the account. These are as per usual photo ID, domestic bills etc.
They have also provided a list of the acceptable certifiers, which are all professional ranks of people, e.g. solicitors, chartered accountants, police officers etc. Curiously, GPs are not on the list.
To do this is a real burden upon this charity for two reasons. One, our solicitors have quoted me £15 per document + VAT - x6 that comes to £108. Moreover, I also have to round each of the other two authorisers up to present themselves in person with the IDs to get them certified. As we're all volunteers with busy professional lives outside this work, this is a total nightmare. It would be like herding cats. This is a time and cost resource we can ill afford and I'd rather spend our money on fulfilling our charitable aims and objectives.
To my simple way of thinking, all a certification is achieving is saying 'yes, this person is the one sitting in front of me and I agree these documents relate to them.' Why does this need to be a person of professional standing and qualification to be acceptable and why does their word by implication carry more credence than, for example, our next door neighbours (who probably know any of us better than my solicitor). No disrespect intended.
So, my genuine question is this - is there a legal reason why the certifiers have to be of professional standing?

The certifiers have to be someone you can look up in a professional capacity, I would suggest. Otherwise it could be just anyone signing something off as a true copy. You'd end up having to get ID from the person certifying the ID and it would all go round in a big silly circle !

When I certify copies we have a stamp in the office, I have to sign it , print name, sometimes print SRA number and sometimes field a phone call asking if I genuinely signed off the certified copy ID. These rules aren't invented by solicitors for their financial benefit but are imposed by anti money laundering regulations and for good reasons. I have had to unravel cases where a fraudster has impersonated a property owner and sold a property. The solicitor didn't do proper ID checks and went out of business. We charge £20 including VAT for certifying 2 dox per person which is less than the time cost of my normal work. Others just don't bother doing it as it is a distraction from the work which keeps firms in business.

Some financial institutions go so far as to request that I certify that Mr XYZ has attended and presented his ID - all I can say (unless I have known the person in question for some time) is whether the person presenting the ID for copying looks like the photo.

The FCA requires advisers to check client ID and this has all been around for a good few years now. It is an important anti-fraud protection IMHO and professionals can be disciplined if they act without checking their clients are who they claim to be.

Not sure this helps but if the investment advisors want the ID they will usually accept sight of the original documents and take their own copies without charge. Sometimes original ID documents are sent by special delivery & returned in the same way.

 

[CharlieB]

Many thanks @rvw and @Arjimlad . Exactly the clarification I was looking for.