An account holder (A) held an account with the bank (B). A had instructed B to transfer several large amounts of money. B was suspicious and reported its suspicions under POCA. It made the transfers when it got consent to do so. A claimed B had breached its duty to take reasonable care in maintaining the account and had delayed acting on his instructions. A argued that there were no rational grounds for B’s suspicion and, as such, it did not have a "relevant suspicion" under the law. The Court found for B.
- How-to guide How-to guide: How to navigate challenges relating to Source of Wealth and Source of Funds (UK)
- How-to guide How-to guide: How to monitor Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) compliance (USA) Recently updated
- How-to guide How-to guide: How to appoint a Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) compliance officer (USA) Recently updated