We have encountered a potential issue / instability with the self
link identifier in the PSC snapshots – it seems this identifier stays the same even if a PSC record has been updated with a completely different PSC entity.
Example
Note: certain fields have been omitted for brevity.
Before (in the 2017-09-12 snapshot):
{
"company_number":"05138754",
"data":{
"etag":"3f0d4ac33cdc74453858078a186217b406ef7361",
"identification":{
"registration_number":"722401"
},
"kind":"corporate-entity-person-with-significant-control",
"links":{
"self":"/company/05138754/persons-with-significant-control/corporate-entity/CDqU8cEeFe73mA97RMYv3RD5muM"
},
"name":"Six Continents Hotels International Limited",
"notified_on":"2016-04-06"
}
}
After (in the 2018-02-20 snapshot):
{
"company_number":"05138754",
"data":{
"etag":"3fd1582324e0a9aa6a30298d8934971073e066e2",
"identification":{
"registration_number":"6724223"
},
"kind":"corporate-entity-person-with-significant-control",
"links":{
"self":"/company/05138754/persons-with-significant-control/corporate-entity/CDqU8cEeFe73mA97RMYv3RD5muM"
},
"name":"Intercontinental (Pb) 1",
"notified_on":"2016-04-06"
}
}
… as evident: the self
link is the same (and thus the record is considered the same between the two snapshots). However, the registration_number
differs, which suggests these are completely different PSC registrations and should be provided with different identifiers?
It’s possible we’ve misunderstood the nature of this self
link as an identifier, so clarifications on this behaviour would be greatly appreciated.