A mixed report for money laundering officers

Abstract

Purpose

The aim is to explain the meaning of a May 2012 High Court decision and Financial Services Authority fine and their importance for money laundering reporting officers (MLROs) and those who oversee anti‐money laundering (AML) controls.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper explains: a High Court decision rejecting a customer's claims for damages and upholding an MLRO's and a bank's refusal to execute a customer's payment instructions when they had genuine suspicions in relation to proposed transactions; and a relatively high financial penalty the FSA imposed on an MLRO who failed to identify due diligence shortcomings during his checks of customer files, to adequately review AML systems and controls, or to revise training procedures to address shortcomings he identified.

Findings

Both decisions provide useful reminders of the range of criminal, civil and regulatory liabilities that financial institutions and their employees can face if they do not follow proper AML procedures.

Originality/value

The paper provides practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

Citation

Saunders, M. and Stott, C. (2012), "A mixed report for money laundering officers", Journal of Investment Compliance, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 60-62. https://doi.org/10.1108/15285811211266128