Which step should the investigator take next?

A KYC specialist from the first line of defense at a bank initiates an internal escalation based on a

letter of credit received by the bank.

MEMO To: Jane Doe. Compliance Manager, Bank B From: Jack Brown, KYC Specialist, Bank B RE: Concerning letter of credit A letter of credit (LC) was received from a correspondent bank. Bank A. in Country A. in Asia with strict capital controls, providing guarantee of payment to Bank B’s client for the export of 10 luxury cars located in Country B. located in Europe. Bank A’s customer is a general in the army where Bank A is headquartered.

The information contained in the LC is as follows:

• Advising amount per unit 30.000.00 EU •10 units of BMW

• Model IX3

• Year of registration: 2020

Upon checks on Bank B’s client, the exporter mentioned that the transactions were particularly important, and a fast process would be much appreciated in order to avoid reputational damage to the firm and the banks involved in the trade finance process. The exporter has a longstanding relationship with Bank B and was clearly a good income generator. The exporter indicated that, as a general, the importer was trustworthy.

The relationship manager <RM) was contacted to conduct a full review of the exporter and to conduct a site visit.

Feedback from the RM:

The RM contacted the exporter for a client courtesy visit, but it was rearranged four times as the exporter kept cancelling the appointments. When the exporter was finally pinned down for an interview, employees were reluctant to provide clear answers about the basis of the transaction. The employees were evasive when asked about the wider business and trade activity in the country.

Findings from the investigation from various internal and external sources of information:

• There were no negative news or sanctions hits on the exporter company, directors, and shareholders.

• The registered address of the exporting business was a residential address.

• The price of the cats was checked and confirmed to be significantly below the market price of approximately 70,000 EU, based on manufacturer’s new price guide.

• The key controllers behind the exporting company, that is the directors and During the investigation, the investigator determines that a nephew of the general (Bank A’s customer) is a customer at Bank B.

Which step should the investigator take next?

A. File a SAR/STR in relation to corruption involving the nephew and the general.

B. Determine whether there is a business relationship between the nephew and the general.

C. Seek senior management approval to continue the relationship with the nephew.

D. Flag the nephew as a PEP by association.

View Answer

Answer: D

Explanation:

The step that the investigator should take next is to flag the nephew as a PEP by association (D). This is because the nephew is related to a general who is a senior military official and a customer of Bank A, which is a high-risk jurisdiction with strict capital controls. According to the ACAMS Advanced Financial Crimes Investigations Certification Study Guide1, “the FI should identify and flag any customers who are PEPs or have close associations with PEPs, such as family members or business partners” (p. 24). The FI should also conduct enhanced due diligence on these customers and monitor their transactions for any suspicious or unusual activity.

The other options are not correct. The investigator should not file a SAR/STR in relation to corruption involving the nephew and the general (A), as this could be premature or unnecessary, as there is no evidence of corruption or criminal activity between them. The investigator should not determine whether there is a business relationship between the nephew and the general (B), as this is not relevant or material to the investigation, as the nephew and the general are customers of different banks and are not involved in the same transaction. The investigator should not seek senior management approval to continue the relationship with the nephew ©, as this could be premature or disproportionate, as there is no indication that the nephew poses a high risk or requires termination.

Reference: 1: ACAMS Advanced Financial Crimes Investigations Certification Study Guide, available at ACAMS