UK: Financial Crime Controls

FCA Loses Patience
Last Updated: 20 November 2014
Article by Emma Radmore, Luca Salerno and Tom Harkus

In November 2014, FCA published the results of two thematic reviews into how firms manage their financial crime risks, together with proposed guidance on financial crime systems and controls. The clear message from the papers, and the press release that accompanied them, is that FCA is losing patience. It found many practices that continue to show significant weakness, and accused firms of not using common sense or getting the basics right. In this article, we look at the reviews and guidance, and what firms should do to get financial crime prevention compliance right.

THE BACKGROUND

Firms should not be strangers to FCA's interest in financial crime controls. It and its predecessor had conducted various reviews over the past few years, including:

  • private banks' anti-money laundering (AML) systems and controls in 2007;
  • implementation of a risk-based approach to AML in 2008;
  • UK financial sanctions controls in 2009;
  • bribery and corruption in insurance broking in 2010;
  • small firms' financial crime review in 2010;
  • bank management of high-risk money laundering situations in 2011;
  • anti-bribery and corruption (ABC) systems and controls in investment banks in 2012; and
  • banks' control of financial crime risks in trade finance in 2013.

Many significant fines have either pre-empted or followed the reviews. There are now too many to list, but their common themes have been:

  • failure to conduct proper customer due diligence (CDD) and specifically failure to recognise when to conduct enhanced due diligence (EDD);
  • over-reliance on head offices in other jurisdictions, instead of independent risk assessment;
  • failure to understand the nature of intermediary or distributor relationships and therefore inability to properly assess bribery and corruption risks; and
  • the only action taken under the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 (MLR) for failure to have in place adequate sanctions systems and controls.

A further theme, common across the final notices, is that there is no need for FCA to find actual incidences of money laundering, sanctions breaches or bribery. Firms (and sometimes their Money Laundering Reporting Officers (MLROs) also) can suffer heavy fines when FCA considers their procedures, systems and controls would not have been good enough to detect a breach of the law.

THEMATIC REVIEW – AML AND SANCTIONS RISK MANAGEMENT IN SMALL BANKS

FCA carried out its review on how small banks manage money laundering and sanctions risks as an update to the 2011 review. It wanted to see how the sector had responded to the issues it had raised and how small banks' AML systems and controls had improved as a result of the review.

What did FCA look at?

The review covered 21 smaller banks, five of which had been part of the 2011 review. The 21 included seven wholesale banks, six retail banks and eight wealth management and private banks. The review addressed:

Governance, culture and management information

FCA found some improvement here.

  • It still found weaknesses in governance but on the whole saw improvements in senior management engagement on AML issues. It was disappointed it had taken many banks more than a year from the 2011 report to assess their systems and controls and found many reviews had in fact followed FCA taking enforcement action against similar firms. Generally, though, FCA found one third of the banks it surveyed did not have sufficient AML resources. In most firms, the MLRO was also the compliance officer and sometimes also the internal auditor. While this need not be a problem, it often meant there were inadequate AML resources to oversee compliance and keep up to date with standards.
  • Of more concern, perhaps, was the finding that UK operations of overseas banks still adopted their parent's or head office's culture, even where this did not align with UK law and regulation. This was a particular problem where the UK CEO came from the home country office on a short-term posting – although one bank embedded a good culture through overall management support despite the fact that it changed its branch manager regularly.
  • FCA found most firms produced regular management information but presented it only in the MLRO annual report, and not in a way that would enable senior management to make use of it to properly manage money laundering risk.

Risk assessment

FCA found over half the banks had not assessed their overall inherent money laundering risk, and had focused only on individual customers. Even then, FCA was not impressed with the quality of individual customer risk assessments, and found only three of the banks had adequate assessment procedures. FCA stressed it expects banks to take a holistic view of risks of business relationships, rather than, for example, just assessing whether the customer was connected to a Politically Exposed Person (PEP) or basing an analysis solely on the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) lists. In the worst cases, senior management and the MLRO could not discuss the risks their business presented.

CDD

Most banks do carry out CDD and use software to carry out PEP checks. FCA was particularly impressed with one MLRO who refused to waive CDD despite pressure from the overseas parent bank. However, it was disappointed that many banks did not capture enough information on the purpose of the business relationship.

EDD

FCA found banks still often fail to conduct EDD consistently on their high-risk relationships, and struggled particularly with the requirement to identify source of wealth and funds of PEPs. There was misunderstanding as to what "source of funds" meant, and often failure to carry out basic searches on publicly available information on high-risk customers. FCA also found banks recognised the need for EDD on correspondent banks, but their diligence was poor and did not provide the banks with enough information.

Reliance

FCA found that banks that relied on others to carry out CDD often did not check whether the CDD on which they relied matched their own risk assessment and did not have enough information to carry out appropriate ongoing monitoring.

Enhanced ongoing monitoring

FCA found some banks had not established the expected pattern of customer transactions at the beginning of a relationship and so could not identify when transactions were suspicious. Half the banks had no "red flags" other than based on the size of transactions, but two banks had introduced better monitoring into their automated systems to reduce reliance on Relationship Managers (RMs) spotting unusual patterns. In most cases, RMs had not received proper training on spotting red flags. On periodic reviews, FCA found good practices in two private banks, but in many other banks in the sample found no evidence of periodic reviews.

Sanctions

FCA found banks were generally aware of their obligations under sanctions laws, but that where compliance was not responsible for screening there was lack of oversight on currency of systems and weak quality assurance. Many banks did not understand how their systems were calibrated and some had excluded certain types of payment transactions from screening altogether.

Training and awareness

FCA found most banks gave annual computer-based training. Staff understanding of AML and sanctions requirements was generally weaker in smaller banks than in larger ones, although private banks' staff on the whole had notably better knowledge. Worse, FCA found MLROs in a quarter of the banks visited had inadequate knowledge and sometimes made their institutions' AML systems and controls less effective rather than more. It says several banks have replaced their MLROs since FCA visited them.

Actions taken since the 2011 review

FCA found that three of the five banks also involved in the previous review had studied the results of that review and of the subsequent enforcement notices and had taken, or were taking, action. Two banks had done nothing, and FCA is following up with them. Of the remaining banks, nine had reviewed the report and notices and were taking action but the others had done nothing.

Conclusions

Although FCA found, and highlighted in its report, some pleasing examples of good practice, on the whole it was disappointed that many of the banks had made little or no progress since the 2011 review. It found the private banks were generally better than the other banks. It says the good practices it noted show it is possible for small banks to manage their business in line with legal and regulatory AML requirements. FCA has given feedback to all the banks it visited. Six banks concerned it particularly and it has started enforcement investigations into two of them. It has required three of the banks to appoint skilled persons, while the other three are conducting remedial work using external consultants. Four of the six have agreed to limit business activities with certain high-risk customers while they address their failings.

MANAGING BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION RISK IN COMMERCIAL INSURANCE BROKING

In its other review, FCA visited 10 small or medium-sized insurance intermediaries, nine of which were Lloyd's brokers and half of which had been part of the review that led to the 2010 report. It wanted to see not only how industry had responded to the report but also to see whether intermediaries were addressing bribery and corruption risk properly across their businesses.

What did FCA look at?

As with the bank review, FCA covered several key areas.

Governance and management information (MI)

FCA found eight intermediaries in its survey had appointed senior managers to take control of ABC systems and controls but many of them did not receive the right MI to allow them to have proper oversight of the bribery and corruption risks to which their businesses were exposed.

Risk assessment

The 2010 review had criticised firms for taking too few factors into account when assessing the risks of individual relationships, and FCA found the quality of assessments had not improved.

Business-wide risk assessments

Only half the intermediaries surveyed had carried out proper business-wide reviews, with others at best restricting their review to certain key relationships. On the whole, firms failed to consider their overall exposures, or risks beyond immediate relationships.

Risk assessments and due diligence on individual relationships

Again, firms showed little improvement from the previous review, often reviewing relationships merely from a geographical perspective, without looking at the relationship holistically, or varying the due diligence carried out in line with the risk classification. Firms did not seek approval for higher-risk relationships and often did not have enough understanding of the risks to focus their resources on the highest-risk areas of business.

Ongoing monitoring and review

FCA found there had been slow progress towards any meaningful ongoing monitoring.

Payment controls

Again, FCA found poor quality diligence continues and this reduced effectiveness of insurance broking payments systems as a risk mitigant. For accounts payable, there are now better gifts and entertainment policies, but many intermediaries could not explain why thresholds in their procedures had been set at particular levels.

Recruitment and remuneration

FCA saw improvement in this area. Firms had put in place remuneration and bonus structures that did not depend solely on business generated and did reward compliance. Also intermediaries now carry out a range of appropriate pre-employment checks.

Training and awareness

Most intermediaries now deliver training, but some deliver it on a one-off basis only, or deliver the same training to all staff. FCA noted that the firm that used scenario-based training, followed by a test, and accompanied by training plans appropriate to the employee's role, had staff who were notably better informed than in other firms.

Whistleblowing

FCA found most respondents had a whistleblowing procedure in place, but that it was rarely, if ever, used.

Action since the 2010 report

FCA found the five intermediaries that were part of the previous sample had all carried out gap analyses based on the previous report and guidance. They had also considered the impact of enforcement actions. But two firms were still in the process of implementing changes. Of the other intermediaries, two had carried out a gap analysis and were working on improving procedures, while three had not considered the previous report, guidance or enforcement cases.

WHAT NEXT?

The overriding message from FCA is disappointment. It is clear some firms have carefully considered the previous reports and enforcement notices. From the banking report, it seems private banks have taken FCA's concerns on board to a greater extent than the other banks surveyed and have correspondingly made more progress towards change. From the insurance report, many intermediaries have implemented the easier fixes, and those involved in the previous review have gone further.

What is clear, though, is that both sectors reviewed, in both areas of financial crime prevention reviewed, still have a long way to go to fix the difficult matters. In particular, firms still struggle to understand the due diligence they must carry out in order to assess all relevant risks – customer risks, product risks and overall risks. And, once they do this, understanding the right MI to present to senior management in a way that gives senior management a clear picture of where the largest risks lie.

So, now, FCA has started enforcement investigations into some of the firms surveyed and imposed skilled persons or business limitations on others. It has also published a guidance consultation proposing additions and amendments to the Financial Crime Guide (FC). The changes will set out the examples of good practice it observed in the reviews, and will clarify what it expects. Many of the changes it proposes to part 1 of FC are high level, focusing on what MI firms should provide, and how they should carry out business-wide risk assessments.

THE MESSAGE FOR FIRMS

Firms ignore any thematic review at their peril, regardless of whether it is aimed at their sector or not. Now, FCA has carried out reviews of reviews, and found many firms have done just that. Its message is clear that these firms will pay the price. It is imperative that all firms, regardless of their size, business or risk profile, consider these reviews, FC and the proposals for change. It is equally imperative that they act to conduct a gap analysis and, if they find their policies, systems and controls lacking in a way that FCA has criticised, take immediate and decisive action to remedy the fault. FCA showed from the last batch of thematic reviews the level of enforcement action that may follow and has given clear signs it is prepared to do the same again.

This article was written for Financial Regulation International.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Events from this Firm
6 Sep 2018, Business Breakfast, Glasgow, UK

Decarbonising our heat is a key component of The Scottish Energy Strategy and an essential piece of the complex matrix we must tackle if we are to meet our climate change obligations.

11 Sep 2018, Business Breakfast, Milton Keynes, UK

Join us for our next development breakfast round table event reflecting on the on-going planning discussion regarding the Oxford-Cambridge corridor and helping you consider how best to cash in on the exciting opportunities by considering the benefits of promotion and option agreements.

20 Sep 2018, Seminar, London, UK

Environmental regulation and liability have risen up the boardroom agenda over the past decade. Recent changes to environmental sentencing have brought this area of risk even more into focus.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions