Starting up as a sole trader in partners name

Jillanddy

noitsnotme said:

Jillanddy said:

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

If there is no financial benefit, even if it can be done, should it be done? It seems like an odd arrangement. You are suggesting putting assets in one name and the business in another? That just screams the question "what are you trying to hide / avoid?". To say nothing of potential risks to one or the other if you split up. I've only ever heard of such arrangements being done in relation to limited companies. And usually exactly because they are definitely hiding something. 

I understand it does sound an odd thing to do, which is why we aren't sure if it even can be done. It's more to protect the house and family car if things were to go seriously wrong within the business. 
Is this a done thing when becoming a sole trader? We would both be putting work in the business venture but only one of us would be classed as self employed as we would both be staying in our current jobs until we could/if we could afford to do this as our main income.

Understandable. And equally so why you want to protect your home.  

Do you get why your clients might want to protect theirs?  Do you not care about them? 

Because, you know,  I'm disabled and I'm lucky - I have an income and money behind me.  Many don't.  So what are you protecting yourselves against? You are trying,  whether successfully or not,  to hide your assets to protect yourselves, at the expense of disabled people.  

Why is my home less important than yours? 

Set up a limited company and get insurance that protects both of us. I'm smart and savvy enough to check that.  Many disabled people may not be. 

I’m confused?  What has them wanting to protect their personal assets got anything to do with disabled people?  Have I missed something as I can’t see any previous mention of people with disabilities?

Apparently quite a lot. Most able bodied people don't need disabled adaptations to their home. But that is perhaps not relevant. If you are happy to believe that your work is good, then you have nothing to hide. If you are seeking to hide money from the CSA (in other words, your own children)....

I repeat... if you are moral and fair, the you don't need yo ask questions like this. Stuff can always go wrong. But here we have two people both with jobs who want yet another job but with no liability either to their clients or to their children. Of course it's possible. But it isn't moral.

MalMonroe

Hi, there's some government info here - https://www.gov.uk/set-up-business

But there's also this - https://www.gov.uk/apply-home-equipment-for-disabled

Would you need to join a specialist association, such as this? British Healthcare Trades Association (BHTA)

Do you have enough capital to buy equipment before supply and installation?

Do you have anywhere to store such equipment prior to installation? 

Have you and/or your partner done extensive research into this kind of business? I know you say he's experienced and competent but does he have any relevant qualifications?  

Is there a necessity to have specific training - or any Health and Safety certification - to supply and fit that kind of equipment? And if so, does your partner have it? 

There' s more info here - https://www.bromley.gov.uk/leaflet/122523/17/683/d

This kind of business is very specialised - are you sure you would both be able to continue working whilst also carrying out this type of work? It isn't the kind of work that anyone can do 'on the side'. Especially as you also have children. 

I set up my own small business last year and it is not a walk in the park at first. (Mine is only a small online consultancy.)

There's a lot more for both of you to consider here than just insurance and tax.

You are very wise to be an 'overthinker' because it's not just the two of you, you have a family to consider. 

ECSD

Do you have enough capital to buy equipment before supply and installation?

Do you have anywhere to store such equipment prior to installation? 

Have you and/or your partner done extensive research into this kind of business? I know you say he's experienced and competent but does he have any relevant qualifications?  

Is there a necessity to have specific training - or any Health and Safety certification - to supply and fit that kind of equipment? And if so, does your partner have it? 

This kind of business is very specialised - are you sure you would both be able to continue working whilst also carrying out this type of work? It isn't the kind of work that anyone can do 'on the side'. Especially as you also have children. 

I set up my own small business last year and it is not a walk in the park at first. (Mine is only a small online consultancy.)

There's a lot more for both of you to consider here than just insurance and tax.

You are very wise to be an 'overthinker' because it's not just the two of you, you have a family to consider. 

Thank you for you super helpful comment! 

We have considered for a long time if this is something we could profit from both money wise and time wise. Although like you said it’s not a walk in the park, we are hoping it will give us more freedom in both cases too. 

We are certain that all insurance/training/qualification etc can be covered as he has worked in the mobility trade for over 10 years as an engineer on stairlifts and scooters. 

I think I just wanted to make sure there was nothing we were missing before we made the jump as I know things can get complicated when trying to make the most out of your business. Whether it’s morally correct or not. Don’t we all do it from time to time. 

Hope your new business venture is going well. It sounds like you would be very good at online consultancy 🙂

ECSD

Jillanddy said:

noitsnotme said:

Jillanddy said:

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

If there is no financial benefit, even if it can be done, should it be done? It seems like an odd arrangement. You are suggesting putting assets in one name and the business in another? That just screams the question "what are you trying to hide / avoid?". To say nothing of potential risks to one or the other if you split up. I've only ever heard of such arrangements being done in relation to limited companies. And usually exactly because they are definitely hiding something. 

I understand it does sound an odd thing to do, which is why we aren't sure if it even can be done. It's more to protect the house and family car if things were to go seriously wrong within the business. 
Is this a done thing when becoming a sole trader? We would both be putting work in the business venture but only one of us would be classed as self employed as we would both be staying in our current jobs until we could/if we could afford to do this as our main income.

Understandable. And equally so why you want to protect your home.  

Do you get why your clients might want to protect theirs?  Do you not care about them? 

Because, you know,  I'm disabled and I'm lucky - I have an income and money behind me.  Many don't.  So what are you protecting yourselves against? You are trying,  whether successfully or not,  to hide your assets to protect yourselves, at the expense of disabled people.  

Why is my home less important than yours? 

Set up a limited company and get insurance that protects both of us. I'm smart and savvy enough to check that.  Many disabled people may not be. 

I’m confused?  What has them wanting to protect their personal assets got anything to do with disabled people?  Have I missed something as I can’t see any previous mention of people with disabilities?

Apparently quite a lot. Most able bodied people don't need disabled adaptations to their home. But that is perhaps not relevant. If you are happy to believe that your work is good, then you have nothing to hide. If you are seeking to hide money from the CSA (in other words, your own children)....

I repeat... if you are moral and fair, the you don't need yo ask questions like this. Stuff can always go wrong. But here we have two people both with jobs who want yet another job but with no liability either to their clients or to their children. Of course it's possible. But it isn't moral.

I think you are missing the point in my post. It’s not a matter of having no liability. We would ensure all insurance and safety measure are in place before any work in undertaken. Mainly for the customers benefit. 

And we of course take full responsibility for the children. Their mother however. Is another story. We find everything we can for them. But do not wish to be lining the pockets of their benefit frauding mother. We would rather spend the money on the children ourselves then pay for their mother to live a life of luxury while she doesn’t work while we can’t afford to.

Our question is simply; if the sole trader is in one name, will the insurance be valid (in order to protect our customers) if in the other persons name?

68ComebackSpecial

ECSD said:

Do you have enough capital to buy equipment before supply and installation?

Do you have anywhere to store such equipment prior to installation? 

Have you and/or your partner done extensive research into this kind of business? I know you say he's experienced and competent but does he have any relevant qualifications?  

Is there a necessity to have specific training - or any Health and Safety certification - to supply and fit that kind of equipment? And if so, does your partner have it? 

This kind of business is very specialised - are you sure you would both be able to continue working whilst also carrying out this type of work? It isn't the kind of work that anyone can do 'on the side'. Especially as you also have children. 

I set up my own small business last year and it is not a walk in the park at first. (Mine is only a small online consultancy.)

There's a lot more for both of you to consider here than just insurance and tax.

You are very wise to be an 'overthinker' because it's not just the two of you, you have a family to consider. 

Thank you for you super helpful comment! 

We have considered for a long time if this is something we could profit from both money wise and time wise. Although like you said it’s not a walk in the park, we are hoping it will give us more freedom in both cases too. 

We are certain that all insurance/training/qualification etc can be covered as he has worked in the mobility trade for over 10 years as an engineer on stairlifts and scooters. 

I think I just wanted to make sure there was nothing we were missing before we made the jump as I know things can get complicated when trying to make the most out of your business. Whether it’s morally correct or not. Don’t we all do it from time to time. 

Hope your new business venture is going well. It sounds like you would be very good at online consultancy 🙂

No. Fortunately for society the majority have a moral compass and pay what is due without attempting to dodge/ evade/ avoid. 

I can already think of a couple of flaws in your plan - which could cost you in the long term - but I won't be elaborating as I can't condone your attempts to avoid your obligations.

[Deleted User]

ECSD said:

 
We are thinking of starting up our own business supplying and installing stairlifts and mobility aids. 

My partner is very experience and competent with his work or we would not be thinking of going into a very niche market. So we definitely are NOT setting out to exploit disabled people. Especially as we do have extremely disabled members of our family.

Please do not fool yourselves, this is not a niche market, at all. Quite the opposite with people preferring the well known bigger names. It's a feast and famine sector if you are small fry.

I thought I could be suited because of a disabled brother but honestly it is no where close to dealing with the actual target audience.

I am well aware of someone who use to do wet rooms, then had to move into the rise and recline chairs sales...

Thrugelmir

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

noitsnotme said:

Jillanddy said:

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

If there is no financial benefit, even if it can be done, should it be done? It seems like an odd arrangement. You are suggesting putting assets in one name and the business in another? That just screams the question "what are you trying to hide / avoid?". To say nothing of potential risks to one or the other if you split up. I've only ever heard of such arrangements being done in relation to limited companies. And usually exactly because they are definitely hiding something. 

I understand it does sound an odd thing to do, which is why we aren't sure if it even can be done. It's more to protect the house and family car if things were to go seriously wrong within the business. 
Is this a done thing when becoming a sole trader? We would both be putting work in the business venture but only one of us would be classed as self employed as we would both be staying in our current jobs until we could/if we could afford to do this as our main income.

Understandable. And equally so why you want to protect your home.  

Do you get why your clients might want to protect theirs?  Do you not care about them? 

Because, you know,  I'm disabled and I'm lucky - I have an income and money behind me.  Many don't.  So what are you protecting yourselves against? You are trying,  whether successfully or not,  to hide your assets to protect yourselves, at the expense of disabled people.  

Why is my home less important than yours? 

Set up a limited company and get insurance that protects both of us. I'm smart and savvy enough to check that.  Many disabled people may not be. 

I’m confused?  What has them wanting to protect their personal assets got anything to do with disabled people?  Have I missed something as I can’t see any previous mention of people with disabilities?

Apparently quite a lot. Most able bodied people don't need disabled adaptations to their home. But that is perhaps not relevant. If you are happy to believe that your work is good, then you have nothing to hide. If you are seeking to hide money from the CSA (in other words, your own children)....

I repeat... if you are moral and fair, the you don't need yo ask questions like this. Stuff can always go wrong. But here we have two people both with jobs who want yet another job but with no liability either to their clients or to their children. Of course it's possible. But it isn't moral.

I think you are missing the point in my post. It’s not a matter of having no liability. We would ensure all insurance and safety measure are in place before any work in undertaken. Mainly for the customers benefit. 

And we of course take full responsibility for the children. Their mother however. Is another story. We find everything we can for them. But do not wish to be lining the pockets of their benefit frauding mother. We would rather spend the money on the children ourselves then pay for their mother to live a life of luxury while she doesn’t work while we can’t afford to.

Our question is simply; if the sole trader is in one name, will the insurance be valid (in order to protect our customers) if in the other persons name?

If you insure a car in your name only, who is covered by the insurance policy? 

Jillanddy

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

noitsnotme said:

Jillanddy said:

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

If there is no financial benefit, even if it can be done, should it be done? It seems like an odd arrangement. You are suggesting putting assets in one name and the business in another? That just screams the question "what are you trying to hide / avoid?". To say nothing of potential risks to one or the other if you split up. I've only ever heard of such arrangements being done in relation to limited companies. And usually exactly because they are definitely hiding something. 

I understand it does sound an odd thing to do, which is why we aren't sure if it even can be done. It's more to protect the house and family car if things were to go seriously wrong within the business. 
Is this a done thing when becoming a sole trader? We would both be putting work in the business venture but only one of us would be classed as self employed as we would both be staying in our current jobs until we could/if we could afford to do this as our main income.

Understandable. And equally so why you want to protect your home.  

Do you get why your clients might want to protect theirs?  Do you not care about them? 

Because, you know,  I'm disabled and I'm lucky - I have an income and money behind me.  Many don't.  So what are you protecting yourselves against? You are trying,  whether successfully or not,  to hide your assets to protect yourselves, at the expense of disabled people.  

Why is my home less important than yours? 

Set up a limited company and get insurance that protects both of us. I'm smart and savvy enough to check that.  Many disabled people may not be. 

I’m confused?  What has them wanting to protect their personal assets got anything to do with disabled people?  Have I missed something as I can’t see any previous mention of people with disabilities?

Apparently quite a lot. Most able bodied people don't need disabled adaptations to their home. But that is perhaps not relevant. If you are happy to believe that your work is good, then you have nothing to hide. If you are seeking to hide money from the CSA (in other words, your own children)....

I repeat... if you are moral and fair, the you don't need yo ask questions like this. Stuff can always go wrong. But here we have two people both with jobs who want yet another job but with no liability either to their clients or to their children. Of course it's possible. But it isn't moral.

I think you are missing the point in my post. It’s not a matter of having no liability. We would ensure all insurance and safety measure are in place before any work in undertaken. Mainly for the customers benefit. 

And we of course take full responsibility for the children. Their mother however. Is another story. We find everything we can for them. But do not wish to be lining the pockets of their benefit frauding mother. We would rather spend the money on the children ourselves then pay for their mother to live a life of luxury while she doesn’t work while we can’t afford to.

Our question is simply; if the sole trader is in one name, will the insurance be valid (in order to protect our customers) if in the other persons name?

No I am not missing the point. You think that you are morally / legally correct in deliberately hiding money because you say that someone else is acting in a dubious manner. Allegedly. What you prefer is irrelevant. You are acting no better than her (if what you say is true). And asking people here to help you out doing it. 

General_Grant

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

noitsnotme said:

Jillanddy said:

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

If there is no financial benefit, even if it can be done, should it be done? It seems like an odd arrangement. You are suggesting putting assets in one name and the business in another? That just screams the question "what are you trying to hide / avoid?". To say nothing of potential risks to one or the other if you split up. I've only ever heard of such arrangements being done in relation to limited companies. And usually exactly because they are definitely hiding something. 

I understand it does sound an odd thing to do, which is why we aren't sure if it even can be done. It's more to protect the house and family car if things were to go seriously wrong within the business. 
Is this a done thing when becoming a sole trader? We would both be putting work in the business venture but only one of us would be classed as self employed as we would both be staying in our current jobs until we could/if we could afford to do this as our main income.

Understandable. And equally so why you want to protect your home.  

Do you get why your clients might want to protect theirs?  Do you not care about them? 

Because, you know,  I'm disabled and I'm lucky - I have an income and money behind me.  Many don't.  So what are you protecting yourselves against? You are trying,  whether successfully or not,  to hide your assets to protect yourselves, at the expense of disabled people.  

Why is my home less important than yours? 

Set up a limited company and get insurance that protects both of us. I'm smart and savvy enough to check that.  Many disabled people may not be. 

I’m confused?  What has them wanting to protect their personal assets got anything to do with disabled people?  Have I missed something as I can’t see any previous mention of people with disabilities?

Apparently quite a lot. Most able bodied people don't need disabled adaptations to their home. But that is perhaps not relevant. If you are happy to believe that your work is good, then you have nothing to hide. If you are seeking to hide money from the CSA (in other words, your own children)....

I repeat... if you are moral and fair, the you don't need yo ask questions like this. Stuff can always go wrong. But here we have two people both with jobs who want yet another job but with no liability either to their clients or to their children. Of course it's possible. But it isn't moral.

I think you are missing the point in my post. It’s not a matter of having no liability. We would ensure all insurance and safety measure are in place before any work in undertaken. Mainly for the customers benefit. 

And we of course take full responsibility for the children. Their mother however. Is another story. We find everything we can for them. But do not wish to be lining the pockets of their benefit frauding mother. We would rather spend the money on the children ourselves then pay for their mother to live a life of luxury while she doesn’t work while we can’t afford to.

Our question is simply; if the sole trader is in one name, will the insurance be valid (in order to protect our customers) if in the other persons name?

A business is a business, even when operated by a sole trader.
If it were called StairLiftsAreGr8, you have insurance in that name.
Speak to an insurance broker.

Andy_L

noitsnotme said:

Jillanddy said:

noitsnotme said:

Jillanddy said:

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

If there is no financial benefit, even if it can be done, should it be done? It seems like an odd arrangement. You are suggesting putting assets in one name and the business in another? That just screams the question "what are you trying to hide / avoid?". To say nothing of potential risks to one or the other if you split up. I've only ever heard of such arrangements being done in relation to limited companies. And usually exactly because they are definitely hiding something. 

I understand it does sound an odd thing to do, which is why we aren't sure if it even can be done. It's more to protect the house and family car if things were to go seriously wrong within the business. 
Is this a done thing when becoming a sole trader? We would both be putting work in the business venture but only one of us would be classed as self employed as we would both be staying in our current jobs until we could/if we could afford to do this as our main income.

Understandable. And equally so why you want to protect your home.  

Do you get why your clients might want to protect theirs?  Do you not care about them? 

Because, you know,  I'm disabled and I'm lucky - I have an income and money behind me.  Many don't.  So what are you protecting yourselves against? You are trying,  whether successfully or not,  to hide your assets to protect yourselves, at the expense of disabled people.  

Why is my home less important than yours? 

Set up a limited company and get insurance that protects both of us. I'm smart and savvy enough to check that.  Many disabled people may not be. 

I’m confused?  What has them wanting to protect their personal assets got anything to do with disabled people?  Have I missed something as I can’t see any previous mention of people with disabilities?

Sorry I may have confused some posts as my eyes are bad at the moment. But the point still stands.  Why are the clients assets less important than the OPs? I do understand their point. I don't have to agree with it. 

Jillanddy said:

noitsnotme said:

Jillanddy said:

ECSD said:

Jillanddy said:

If there is no financial benefit, even if it can be done, should it be done? It seems like an odd arrangement. You are suggesting putting assets in one name and the business in another? That just screams the question "what are you trying to hide / avoid?". To say nothing of potential risks to one or the other if you split up. I've only ever heard of such arrangements being done in relation to limited companies. And usually exactly because they are definitely hiding something. 

I understand it does sound an odd thing to do, which is why we aren't sure if it even can be done. It's more to protect the house and family car if things were to go seriously wrong within the business. 
Is this a done thing when becoming a sole trader? We would both be putting work in the business venture but only one of us would be classed as self employed as we would both be staying in our current jobs until we could/if we could afford to do this as our main income.

Understandable. And equally so why you want to protect your home.  

Do you get why your clients might want to protect theirs?  Do you not care about them? 

Because, you know,  I'm disabled and I'm lucky - I have an income and money behind me.  Many don't.  So what are you protecting yourselves against? You are trying,  whether successfully or not,  to hide your assets to protect yourselves, at the expense of disabled people.  

Why is my home less important than yours? 

Set up a limited company and get insurance that protects both of us. I'm smart and savvy enough to check that.  Many disabled people may not be. 

I’m confused?  What has them wanting to protect their personal assets got anything to do with disabled people?  Have I missed something as I can’t see any previous mention of people with disabilities?

Sorry I may have confused some posts as my eyes are bad at the moment. But the point still stands.  Why are the clients assets less important than the OPs? I do understand their point. I don't have to agree with it. 

We don’t even know what type of business the OP is thinking of starting yet do we?  Perhaps a client may be at risk of losing money if a poor product or service is delivered but I highly doubt a clients assets (house/car) would be at any risk unless the business is going to be something financial service related (would likely be regulated in some way then anyway).

The OP's husband is installing electro-mechanical devices (stairlifts) - done incorrectly that could start a house fire.