Anti Money Laundering Review …… Dear CEO – Banking Sector

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), in May 2021, issued a Dear CEO letter entitled “Action needed in response to common control failings identified in anti-money laundering frameworks”. While this letter was issued to banks only, many of the key takeaways of the letter have wider application, notably within the financial advice sector. A copy of the Dear CEO letter can be found here.

Although the Dear CEO letter was specifically issued to banking firms, the FCA’s review serves as a timely reminder for firms of the regulator’s expectations when considering Anti-Money Laundering (AML).

Governance and oversight

A key principle under SYSC 6.3 is that firms are expected to have “adequate policies and procedures” in place in order to:

(1) enable it to identify, assess, monitor and manage money laundering risk; and

(2) are comprehensive and proportionate to the nature, scale and complexity of its activities.

Firms are therefore expected to make an assessment of what they deem to be “adequate” given the risk posed to their business, but are also expected to review these regularly (SYSC 6.3.3).

Amongst other things, firms are also required to have in place a Money Laundering Reporting Officer (SYSC 6.3.9) who would ultimately be the focal point for the firms AML activity, i.e. would have ultimate responsibility.

The Dear CEO letter raises issues in relation to a number of areas in which banking firms have fallen short around Governance and Oversight and where there were instances in which Senior Manager oversight was not evidenced. As a warning note, the FCA outlined that “We have previously taken enforcement action where firms’ governance arrangements were not adequately designed or effective”.

These issues in banking firms could well have read across to advisory firms and we believe it would be prudent for firms to consider the policies and procedures, governance and oversight currently in place to assess whether they can be considered “adequate”.

Firms may find FCG 2.1 and FCG 3.1 helpful when reviewing their existing approach to AML. 

Consumer Due Diligence (CDD) and Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD)

One of the FCA’s concerns was that they have often seen instances in which CDD measures have not adequately been performed or recorded especially since they have provided previous guidance to help firms with establishing a risk-based approach to AML. Reference is also made in the letter to some firms having a “weak” approach to EDD, citing examples including not identifying a client’s source of wealth (SoW) and source of funds (SoF).

For many of our firms the most common higher risk clients from an AML perspective are likely to be either Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) or close associates of a PEP. As such, it is important that firms not only have processes in place to identify PEPs and other high risk customers as part of their CDD, but also that these are followed in the event that the firm identifies a higher risk client. Many firms have chosen to adopt electronic verification tools such as SmartSearch but simply identifying a PEP is not sufficient, acting on this information is equally important.

Furthermore, we would typically expect firms to have in place an approach which identifies a client’s SoF, particularly in the instance where the transaction being conducted is not consistent with their wider financial circumstances.

Important Note: ATEB news is intended to provide general information ONLY. The content, including any views expressed or guidance provided, does not replace the need to comply fully with FCA Rules and Guidance. Unless you have discussed news article content with ATEB, and specifically how it relates to your circumstances, then ATEB disclaims all liability and responsibility and actions arising from any reliance placed upon it. For the avoidance of doubt therefore, any reliance you place on such information without our consultation is at your own risk.

ATEB Compliance offers compliance and regulatory advice.

ATEB Suitability provides report writing software for the financial services market.

Our View

While many firms have AML policies and procedures in place, it is important to be able to demonstrate that these are sufficiently robust to mitigate any risks from an AML perspective.

Action Required By You

Firms should consider whether they have adequate policies and procedures in place, that are appropriately documented and that they can evidence are being followed.
SUIT - Beautiful Reports
CREATE BEAUTIFUL
SUITABILITY
REPORTS
SUIT - Complete Control
TAKE BACK
CONTROL OF YOUR
SUITABILITY REPORT
PRODUCTION
SUIT - Comp confidence
SUITABILITY
REPORTS
WITH FULL
COMPLIANCE
CONFIDENCE
COMP - Hands on
HANDS-ON COMPLIANCE
Helping you to implement solutions
COMP - File checking
FILE CHECKING
All business cases checked, including DB transfers
COMP -166
Section 166 and
Regulatory Reviews
Extensive S166 experience
COMP -healthchecks
Audits and
Health Checks
Need a regulatory check-up?
COMP -166
E-COMPLIANCE
A lighter touch support service
COMP -166
FCA Applications
We have completed hundreds
of Part IV applications
previous arrow
next arrow

About the Author

Paul is a Chartered Financial Planner and is well on his way to a Fellowship. He has a thirst for technical knowledge and, while he advises on all aspects of financial services regulation, he specialises in pensions and investments.

Contact Us

Brought to you by

Explore more articles in this category

Other articles that you might be interested in