HSBC allowing money laundering outrage?

Standard practice really the leak is a bunch of SARS reports, a journalist has got hold of these.Suspicious Acitivity Reports are part of financial crime reporting. They are based on a banks identification of such cases either pre or post the transaction. My reading is the banks in question have identified these transactions and reported them to their regulators.This happens all the time, the difference here is a reporter has got hold of them and picked out the most salcious and trying to build a crooked banks story which I don’t think is there?
 
Standard practice really the leak is a bunch of SARS reports, a journalist has got hold of these.Suspicious Acitivity Reports are part of financial crime reporting. They are based on a banks identification of such cases either pre or post the transaction. My reading is the banks in question have identified these transactions and reported them to their regulators.This happens all the time, the difference here is a reporter has got hold of them and picked out the most salcious and trying to build a crooked banks story which I don’t think is there?

hsbc have a track record of laundering drug money, and got fined a couple of billion dollars. What makes you think they have changed?
 
hsbc have a track record of laundering drug money, and got fined a couple of billion dollars. What makes you think they have changed?
As
Mentioned the evidence in this case are their own reports that they submit to the regulator. Would be a bit odd to say they have purposefully broke the rules and also reported themselves for doing so. Surely any wrong doing they would keep away from the Suspicous Activity report.
 
Yeah, they closed my business account whilst I was working abroad due to Safeguarding, not so long ago (I think it was a reaction to their accumulating fines). They posted me a request of additional information relating to my business and I replied to them (albeit pretty much on deadline as I was not even aware of the initial request until I got home). I contacted them to explain that I could not respond quickly to posted mail as I work abroad, so requested an email or alternate communications to notify me of such requests of information. I headed back to work assuming everything was resolved, they requested further additional information via posted mail, the deadline passed and then they closed my account. I then received a cheque of the balance which I could not cash until I opened another account. That meant I could not pay my Corporation tax on time... Classy outfit. I had used them since 2012 with no issues. I suppose I'm an easy target given the business generates sweet FA in the bigger picture. I remember I called to register a complaint and they cut me off, perhaps my tone was an angry one.

I now use Yorkshire Bank who are HORRENDOUS.
 
Last edited:
As
Mentioned the evidence in this case are their own reports that they submit to the regulator. Would be a bit odd to say they have purposefully broke the rules and also reported themselves for doing so. Surely any wrong doing they would keep away from the Suspicous Activity report.
Apparently you can break the rules, report yourself, then carry on with the same clients.

To quote:
Banks and other financial institutions file SARs when they believe a client is using their services for potential criminal activity. However, the filing of an SAR does not require the bank to cease doing business with the client in question.

Link
 
Apparently you can break the rules, report yourself, then carry on with the same clients.

To quote:
Banks and other financial institutions file SARs when they believe a client is using their services for potential criminal activity. However, the filing of an SAR does not require the bank to cease doing business with the client in question.

Link
Yes that is correct and you are not allowed to tell the client you have reported them as not to tip them off. When you makes the SARs or STR you are basically providing information to the regulators who along with the legal authorities will investigate, at that point the bank has fulfilled their reporting duty.
 
Banks consider it the "cost of doing business" in certain locations.
Deutsche Bank had accounts in their Moscow branch that they didn't know who had opened them or who had access to them and that was all signed off by their internal Audit team.
Obviously when it came out the head of internal audit was fired and had his licences revoked so he couldn't work in the industry again ...
er.. sorry that should be "was made CEO of Deutsche Bank."
 
Yes that is correct and you are not allowed to tell the client you have reported them as not to tip them off. When you makes the SARs or STR you are basically providing information to the regulators who along with the legal authorities will investigate, at that point the bank has fulfilled their reporting duty.

What about their social responsibility?

If they're reporting wrongdoing then surely they'd want to distance themselves from the crooks.
 
What about their social responsibility?

If they're reporting wrongdoing then surely they'd want to distance themselves from the crooks.

You cannot tip off a subject of a SAR as that is a criminal offence. Ceasing to do busIness with an entity subject to a SAR could be classified as tipping off, so not as straightforward as it appears.
 
Yes it’s a bit of a nonsense in some respects the tipping off point as often you have to freeze their account but you are still not allowed to tip them off. The freezing of the account should obviously be enough for them to realise they are being investigated!

there are different scenarios - pre the transaction you can ask the regulators if they want you to proceed with the transaction for which they might approve!

mill have tii I watch the programme but on the face of it it just seems like sensationalist journalism.
 
Fat cat. If you work in finance you will know the stringent procedures you gave to go through compliant wise and the dangers to personal liability for abetting money laundering in any fashion.

I have always found it astounding that Russian money has been allowed to flow through football the way it has over the past 10 years. Most banks have run away from any Russian compliance connections. And I mean RUN.
 
Last edited:
The fact that come people aren't more outraged by the scale of this corruption is unfathomable.

And the authorities chase benefit cheats? But effectively ignore billionaire money laundering?

I can only conclude that some peoples moral compass is a bit skewed.
 
The fact that come people aren't more outraged by the scale of this corruption is unfathomable.

And the authorities chase benefit cheats? But effectively ignore billionaire money laundering?

I can only conclude that some peoples moral compass is a bit skewed.
Totally agree. The fact that people shrug their shoulders at this stuff is just incredible. We have so much inconsistency in this life. A good friend lost her job as a Bank manager with a high street name because an Account was opened that was used subsequently to accept and wash through £1.5m. And yet the authorities turn a blind eye to this kind of blatant criminal activity. In some aspects they clamp down severely. In other aspects they completely turn their heads the other way. It absolutely stinks.
 
Back
Top