Decision

Decision on TUV Property Solutions Limited

Published 23 September 2025

Order under the Companies Act 2006

In the matter of application No. 5330

For a change of company name of registration No. 15814194

Decision

The company name TUV PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LIMITED has been registered since 2 July 2024 under number 15814194.

By an application filed on 11 March 2025, TUV UK LIMITED applied for a change of name of this registration under the provisions of section 69(1) of the Companies Act 2006 (the Act).

A copy of this application was sent to the primary respondent’s registered office on 1 April 2025, in accordance with rule 3(2) of the Company Names Adjudicator Rules 2008. The copy of the application was sent by Royal Mail “Special Delivery” service and also by standard mail. On 1 April 2025, the Tribunal wrote to Trevor Dean Venn (the respondent’s director), to inform them that the applicant had requested that they be joined to the proceedings. No comments were received from Trevor Dean Venn in relation to this request. On 7 April 2025, Trevor Dean Venn, on behalf of the respondent, contacted the Tribunal by email and submitted a detailed response to the application. On 7 April 2025, the Tribunal replied by email stating that it did not appear to have received a form CNA2 to file a defence to the application. The Tribunal provided links to form CNA2 “notice of defence” and information relating to the £150 fee for form CNA2. The respondent was advised that if it chose not to file a form CNA 2 together with the £150 fee, this could mean the adjudicator may treat the application as not being opposed and may make an order under section 73(1) of the Companies Act 2006.

On 10 June 2025, Trevor Dean Venn was joined as a co-respondent. On 10 June 2025, the parties were advised that no defence had been received to the application and so the adjudicator may treat the application as not being opposed. The parties were granted a period of 14 days to request a hearing in relation to this matter, if they so wished. No request for a hearing was made.

On 25 June 2025, Trevor Dean Venn, contacted the Tribunal by email and stated:

I have written to you before about this matter and find it frustrating that the name of company TUV property Solutions Limited is the name of myself, my wife and our surname, not copied from another company. I also use the name propery in the trading so it clearly states what we do. Please reconsider the action as it is surely be right to choose the name if there is a legitimate personal reason.

In response, in an email dated 25 July 2025, the tribunal acknowledged receipt of the respondents email and referred to the terms of official letters dated 7 April 2025 and 10 June 2025 which advised that if the respondent wished to file a form CNA2 (notice of defence) or a form CNA4 (request for a hearing), this should be done within 14 days, that is, on or before 8 August 2025. It was also noted that the forms CNA2/CNA4 should be accompanied by form CNA5 (request for an extension of time) with the appropriate fee in order to request a retrospective extension of time for filing a defence to reflect why the form is being filed out of the prescribed time. The respondent was advised that if no response is received, the case would be referred to the adjudicator to consider making an order to change the name under section 73(1) of the Companies Act 2006.

On 1 August 2025, Trevor Dean Venn, contacted the Tribunal by email and stated:

Just confirm, as this is new to me. The name TUV Property Solutions Limited is the name of the company based on my name, Trevor, my wife’s name, Uliana, and our surname, Venn. I am unsure why I should have to pay or should be challenged to use our name? The name has the use of Property solutions that clearly state our industry and purpose.

In response, in an email dated 8 August 2025, the tribunal acknowledged receipt of the respondents email dated 1 August 2025 and referred to the terms of official letter dated 25 July 2025 which advised that if the respondent wished to file a form CNA2 (notice of defence) or a form CNA4 (request for a hearing), this should be done within 14 days, that is, on or before 8 August 2025. It was also noted that forms CNA2/CNA4 should be accompanied by form CNA5 (request for an extension of time) with the appropriate fee in order to request a retrospective extension of time for filing a defence to reflect why the form is being filed out of the prescribed time. The respondent was provided with links to access Company Names Tribunal forms and fees. The respondent was advised that as previously stated, if no response is received on or before 8 August 2025, the case would be referred to the adjudicator to consider making an order to change the name under section 73(1) of the Companies Act 2006. No response was received.

On 5 September 2025, the Tribunal contacted the parties to advise that as no defence has been filed in these proceedings the case would now be referred to the adjudicator to consider issuing a decision to order a change of name.

The primary respondent did not file a defence within the one month period specified by the adjudicator under rule 3(3) and no request for a retrospective extension of time has been received. Rule 3(4) states:

The primary respondent, before the end of that period, shall file a counter-statement on the appropriate form, otherwise the adjudicator may treat it as not opposing the application and may make an order under section 73(1).

Under the provisions of this rule, the adjudicator may exercise discretion so as to treat the respondent as opposing the application. In this case I can see no reason to exercise such discretion and, therefore, decline to do so.

As the primary respondent has not responded to the allegations made, it is treated as not opposing the application. Therefore, in accordance with section 73(1) of the Act I make the following order:

(a) TUV PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LIMITED shall change its name within one month of the date of this order to one that is not an offending name name;

(b) TUV PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LIMITED and Trevor Dean Venn each shall:

(i) take such steps as are within their power to make, or facilitate the making, of that change;

(ii) not cause or permit any steps to be taken calculated to result in another company being registered with a name that is an offending name.

An “offending name” means a name that, by reason of its similarity to the name associated with the applicant in which he claims goodwill, would be likely to be the subject of a direction under section 67 (power of Secretary of State to direct change of name), or to give rise to a further application under section 69.

In accordance with s.73(3) of the Act, this order may be enforced in the same way as an order of the High Court or, in Scotland, the Court of Session.

In any event, if no such change is made within one month of the date of this order, I will determine a new company name as per section 73(4) of the Act and will give notice of that change under section 73(5) of the Act.

All respondents, including individual co-respondents, have a legal duty under Section 73(1)(b)(ii) of the Companies Act 2006 not to cause or permit any steps to be taken calculated to result in another company being registered with an offending name; this includes the current company. Non-compliance may result in an action being brought for contempt of court and may result in a custodial sentence.

TUV UK LIMITED, having been successful, is entitled to a contribution towards its costs. I order TUV PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LIMITED and Trevor Dean Venn, being jointly and severally liable, to pay TUV UK LIMITED costs on the following basis:

Fee for application: £400
Statement of case: £200

Total: £600

This sum is to be paid within seven days of the expiry of the appeal period or within seven days of the final determination of this case if any appeal against this decision is unsuccessful.

Any notice of appeal against this decision to order a change of name must be given within one month of the date of this order. Appeal is to the High Court in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and to the Court of Session in Scotland.

The company adjudicator must be advised if an appeal is lodged, so that implementation of the order is suspended.

Dated 18 September 2025

Susan Eaves
Company Names Adjudicator