Your domiciliation company's name must appear on the RCS record of every domiciled client — a mandatory mention that often gets forgotten
Article R123-169 of the French Commercial Code requires that the domiciliation contract (the one set out in articles R123-167 and R123-168) be mentioned on the commercial register (RCS) of every domiciled company, together with the domiciliation provider's name or company name and the details of its own registration on a public register. In other words: it is not only the client who must be in order — the domiciliation provider's own presence in that RCS file is verifiable by a third party.
The text is short but precise: "The domiciliation contract [...] is mentioned on the commercial register, with the indication of the name or company name and the details of the main registration on a public register of the domiciliation company." In practice, when a company registers or re-registers at the address of a domiciliation agency, the registry clerk must be able to read, in that company's RCS file, who the domiciliation provider is and where that provider is itself registered. A misspelled company name, a poorly recorded main registration, or an expired contract that was never renewed (the three-month minimum term with tacit renewal, covered in article R123-168) leaves an inconsistent RCS file — visible to anyone who pulls the client's Kbis extract.
AppH's Pack Accueil files nothing with the registry and modifies no RCS record: that remains an act of the domiciliation provider or the client itself, never of the assistant. What a network of six to fifty agencies gains by automating is the cross-check: for each domiciled client, the contract's signature and expiry dates, whether the name used matches what is declared on the RCS, and an alert before tacit renewal quietly masks a contract that has actually lapsed. The assistant flags the discrepancy; it never corrects it with the registry itself.
For AppH
- A network director sees in one table which client files risk having an out-of-sync RCS mention, instead of finding out during an inspection or when a client asks.
- Each domiciliation contract's deadline follows the client file, not one agency's memory: a change of local manager does not erase the trace of a renewal already done.
Against / the honest limit
- AppH does not file, modify, or certify any mention on the commercial register: that act remains entirely the domiciliation provider's or its representative's before the registry.
- AppH never rules on the legal validity of a domiciliation contract or on the regularity of an RCS file: it flags a data discrepancy — the decision and the filing stay human.
R123-169 is a 2007 article, never reformed, and that is exactly why it goes unnoticed — no one rereads it until a client asks why their Kbis looks inconsistent. Our role is not to redo the registry's work: it is to stop thirty agencies from each keeping a different version of the same contractual deadline, scattered across thirty people's memory. An up-to-date table beats a file rebuilt in a hurry the day a client asks the question.
Reviewed by a human at AppH