Best. Subject. Ever.

That Easter bunny had better be stocking up for a major delivery to me, as I am having the busiest week ever, and only the thought of all that chocolate is keeping me going.  I’ve just finished the four Jersey piggies (if that sounds cryptic to new readers, and there are plenty of you this week, you can read all about the piggies here and here) – they’ll be set loose on the world next week.  (No point mixing piggies and bunnies, of course.)  And I have been settling on my agenda for this year’s advanced MLRO workshops in Guernsey.

(Quick aside: I would gladly run these workshops in other jurisdictions too, but the demand is not quite the same.  Guernsey MLROs and I have a special relationship – we don’t ride round in a golf buggy together, but it’s still special.)

I run this advanced workshop twice a year, and it’s new every year, building on its predecessors to give MLROs a really advanced AML education (as demanded by nearly everyone’s legislation these days – MLROs need their own tailored training).  And in the run-up to deciding what to include each year, I go into conniptions.  I am always worried that this year, that most dreaded thing will happen: I will run out of things to say about AML.  For the past few nights I have had my panic dreams.  (Some people have exciting dreams about falling off cliffs or weathering storms at sea, but for those of us who are noted primarily for our organisational skills, the dreams focus on lack of preparedness – last night I went to a wedding and couldn’t find my shoes or my hat or the confetti.)  All through the year I keep a list of “possible workshop topics” – anything that catches my eye is noted on the list, just in case.  And when the big day comes for settling on the workshop agenda, I pull out the list and get busy with the red pen.

Some topics have been superseded and are no longer new and exciting.  Some are not as interesting as I had thought.  And some are just plain weird (“money laundering through animals” – what was I thinking?).  But others still make the grade, and I start to select the eight that will make it into the workshop.  And you know what: there are always more than eight topics that I would love to dissect and deliberate in depth and detail.  I never run out.  In fact, I have to eliminate, and save them for next year.  Like I say: Best. Subject. Ever.

Posted in AML, Money laundering | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

That’s the way to do it

You, like me, are no doubt always on the lookout for handy real life laundering stories – to enliven training, to demonstrate to the sceptical that yes, your bank/company/firm/whatever is susceptible to money laundering, and to augment your own AML education.  And the National Crime Agency is proving a very tasty source of such stories – they are relentless in their pursuit, prosecution and publicising of criminals of all stripes, and are more than happy to slap on a well-deserved money laundering charge or two to boost the penalties.  One recent story caught my eye because it revealed the actual nuts and bolts of what criminals might do to conceal their (what we must call nefarious) activities.

Roger Budgen, from Rhyl in north Wales, was the ringleader of an international drug trafficking and money laundering group.  Over a decade, he and his wife Caroline Hartery deposited more than £300,000 into their bank accounts, despite not declaring any income for the whole period.  Budgen also co-ordinated a money laundering scheme, linking criminals across Europe so that dirty money could be illegally transferred between the continent and the UK.  For instance, criminal cash generated in the UK would be credited to top-up cards denominated in euros and then spent abroad – including in the Netherlands and Spain where Budgen and Hartery spent a considerable amount of time.  According to the NCA: “The [laundering] group used a number of tactics in an attempt to avoid law enforcement detection, including communicating via a number of mobile phones, using public telephone boxes for particularly sensitive conversations, and adopting code-words (such as ‘scratch’ for cash, ‘pollen’ for cannabis and ‘sweat’ for Scottish bank notes).  They used the serial numbers on banknotes as ‘pass-codes’ to validate their couriers’ identities and thus ensure cash was handed over to the right person.  The holder of a cash haul would be given the serial number on a £5 note via a text message [and] the collecting criminal would be in possession of the actual £5 note displaying that number.”

According to Simon Flowers, Branch Commander NCA Wales: “This was a professionally managed crime group who used a range of tactics to try and avoid law enforcement.  But we were able to follow their criminal activity across Europe and bring them to justice.  Budgen was well established within the international criminal community, and had built up a wide network of criminal associates throughout the UK and Europe.  He was clearly the controller of this group, not only overseeing the supply of cannabis and hiding criminal proceeds, but also connecting criminals across Europe to professional money launderers.”

The case against Budgen began in 2010 when investigations revealed the full extent of his criminal connections, and it has led to numerous separate operations being launched across Europe and the arrest of more than fifty people for a range of crimes including drug trafficking and money laundering.  Cash seizures have so far totalled more than £1 million, alongside the seizure of substantial criminal assets, several thousand kilos of cannabis and multiple kilos of cocaine, amphetamine and mephedrone.  Budgen was sentenced to eight-and-a-half years in prison, while Hartery was sentenced to eighteen months suspended for two years.  Budgen was also given a Serious Crime Prevention Order, which will restrict his ability to travel and to use communication media (including mobile phones, internet access and public telephone boxes) for five years after his release from prison.

Posted in Money laundering, Organised crime | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

More front than Blackpool

There is a good reason why those who can form and manage companies (whether as a standalone service, or as part of a wider professional offering) should be included in the AML family: the “front company” is invaluable to criminals in general and money launderers in particular.  Such a company can be used in many ways, as recent news stories demonstrate.

They can be used to cover up criminal activity.  In a recent success for the UK’s National Crime Agency, brothers Glen and Gary Wheatley from the north of England were jailed for lengthy terms for using their coach company to smuggle heroin from the Continent.  They built a secret compartment above one of the wheel arches of their coach (you can see it here), and stuffed it with 12kg of heroin – sitting above it were their oblivious passengers, coming home from a trip to the Christmas markets in Belgium.  The Wheatleys were certainly not the first to see the potential of a transport company as a front business for criminality: who can forget the terrible death of 58 Chinese would-be illegal immigrants in the lorry driven by Perry Wacker in June 2000?

And of course front companies can be used to launder the proceeds of all sorts of crime.  MLROs warn their staff to be aware of the potential for laundering through cash-intensive businesses – takeaway food outlets, pubs, hairdressers, tanning salons and the like.  And sometimes criminals combine the two very effectively, as in the notorious “Paddington black cab gang“, when launderers used the accounts of a taxi firm to launder vast amounts of drug money, and its vehicles to transport both drugs and cash.

Entrepreneurial friends in other countries tell me that they envy the ease with which companies can be incorporated here in the UK, but they are certainly not the only ones to spot that.  We cannot allow the irritation of legitimate business people put us off making thorough due diligence enquiries of every new company – and even more crucially, we must be super-vigilant about monitoring them and making sure that they operate as predicted and expected.

Posted in AML, Money laundering | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A question of morality

A few days ago a journalist contacted me to ask if I could help with some research he was doing into anti-bribery and corruption.  I listened to his brief, and quickly realised that I wasn’t going to be of much use to him at all, as the slant of his piece was more the morality of the thing – is it right to condemn people for acts committed in other jurisdictions where such acts are considered acceptable, if not downright desirable?  The debate about “facilitation payments” rumbles on, it seems – although I did enjoy this take on it, having myself paid for speedier service on certain occasions.  But it made me wonder how history will judge bribery and corruption – will it be like slavery (with most people aghast that anyone in their right mind would have done such a thing), or will it be like smuggling?

Yes, smuggling.  Over the weekend, in order to make a mountain of ironing more palatable, I set up the board in front of one of my beloved videos of “Poldark”.  It was the episode where the brigantine Queen Charlotte comes to grief in Nampara Cove, and rogues from the nearby villages descend to claim “pickins’ for all” from the wrecked goods.  Some of those goods they consume immediately (the crew’s brandy rations don’t last long), but others they carry off for later sale.  At the time (1785), with England struggling to recover from defeat in the American war of independence and the poor starting to question their lot in life, Cornwall was a hotbed of smuggling - the illegal transportation of objects or people, often across international borders.  Through their actions, smugglers were depriving the “revenue man” of his due.  And yet, like all crimes against the taxman, smuggling has somehow acquired glamour.  A while ago I read a book about Zephaniah Job of Polperro, known as the “smuggler’s banker”, by Jeremy Rowett Johns – and the plot outline on Amazon is distinctly favourable: “The Cornishman who masterminded the flourishing contraband trade in Polperro during the Napoleonic wars.  Job’s flair for business, his association with the Trelawny family and links with those engaged in the smuggling trade brought lasting prosperity to the inhabitants of this remote Cornish fishing village at the end of the 18th century”.  Perhaps one day we will talk admiringly of Madoff’s “flair for business” and Curtis Warren bringing “lasting prosperity” to Liverpool.

Posted in AML, Bribery and corruption, Money laundering | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

AML piggies invade the mainland

It’s something of a worry when I do an Amazon search on my own name, and a page full of pigs appears.  But, as fanfared the week before last, I am now firmly in the grip of piggy fever, as the next four editions of “Anti-Money Laundering: What You Need to Know” have hit the bookshelves.  (Well, the servers: these are print-on-demand paperbacks, so there aren’t any physical stocks anywhere – apart from the piles under my desk, of course.)  This is the UK quartet, covering banking, accountancy, insurance and investment, and I have sent press releases and announcements to everyone I can think of – please do let me know if you have any suggestions.

When I first started thinking about writing books, I had a traditional view of publishing: write a book, find a publisher, sell the thing.  It has not worked out like that at all, and – from my perspective – I think it has been a totally unmixed blessing.  For a start, self-publishing is so speedy – I can really react to current demand.  But the real beauty is the print-on-demand-ness of it all.  In short, I upload a text file to the publishing system, and when someone orders a copy of a piggy, it is printed especially for them (at a “brand-new facility” in the UK, apparently) and popped into the post to arrive the next day.  So if the legislation changes, or I decide there is a better way to explain something, or (as has already happened) a case study is updated by a naughty person being sent to prison, I can simply update the text and upload the file again, and then whoever orders from that moment onwards gets the very latest version.  So the piggies are always current – the very height of fashion, as you can doubtless tell from their shades.

Posted in AML, Money laundering | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Losing their amateur ML status

As someone whose entire lifetime expenditure on sports spectating totals just under £40 (that’s two Olympics tickets – for the athletics, at which I saw Usain Bolt in the far, far distance, and for the Greco-Roman wrestling, at which I saw men in leotards doing things to each other that haunt me still), I am perhaps not best placed to pass balanced judgement on the relationship between sport and money.  However, the announcement this week that the new England replica football shirt will cost a whopping £90 did catch my eye – as did the Daily Mash take on the story (warning: it’s a bit rude).

Of perhaps more relevance to those of us obsessed with AML was this recent article in an Indian money magazine about money laundering in sport.  Coming hot on the heels of the conviction of Birmingham City FC former president Carson Yeung for money laundering, the article points out that the big money sports (cricket, boxing, and of course football) are particularly fertile for laundering, with the huge amounts of money involved, combined with poor financial management, the naïvety of (often very young) players, and the corruption of officials.  (A more fulsome explanation of the football sector’s vulnerabilities is given in a 2009 report from the FATF.)  The recent confirmation of jail sentences for eight Romanian football officials, for tax evasion and money laundering, is the latest in a long line.  My only consolation is that in those leotards, frankly, there was nowhere to hide any money.

Posted in AML, Bribery and corruption, Money laundering | Tagged , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Passing the AML parcel

We’re not quite as bad as America, but in the UK we do have a fairly fragmented approach to AML supervision – as soon as I feel a flowchart coming on, as I do when people ask me just who oversees whom, I know it’s too complicated.  But today things are being simplified a little bit.

As of 1 April 2014, regulation of the UK’s 50,000 consumer credit firms – including supervision of them for AML purposes – shifts from the now-defunct Office of Fair Trading to the FCA.  AML supervision of estate agents – once also taken care of by the OFT – moves to HMRC.  (And – in a move that I still slightly fear might be an April Fools’ joke –  the regulation of estate agents is now apparently the responsibility of Powys County Council.  Do you think the man from Powys was on hols when they were looking for a “volunteer”?)

It certainly simplifies matters to reduce the number of AML supervisors (after all, the FCA and HMRC are already doing it for others), but I do wonder whether they will in fact be able to make a better fist of it than the OFT.  Despite a last-minute flurry of fines for naughty estate agents last Friday, the OFT was notable by its silence on AML matters – not least, I suspect, because of an understandable lack of expertise/interest in the subject.  After all, if you’re a hotshot young AML zealot, you’re not going to apply to the OFT when the FCA and HMRC are on offer, are you?  The FCA is already talking the talk (“We won’t shy away from taking tough, decisive action to make sure that the people who rely on these products are treated fairly.  There will be some firms that don’t get the message, or won’t play ball, those firms should know that we won’t let them carry on.“) but there is no escaping the fact that 50,000 is an enormous number of new supervision subjects to acquire.  And colour me cynical, but I’m guessing that AML has not been a huge priority for the 50,000 so far.  Here’s hoping that the FCA tiger has not bitten off more than it can chew.

Posted in AML, Money laundering | Tagged , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Bless me father, for I have laundered

I went out to dinner last night; I figured that after knocking out the first draft of another AML book (I did mention the other day that I’m working on my UK piggy editions now, didn’t I?), I deserved a plate of spaghetti cooked by someone else.  There was a large group of us – some I knew, and some were partners of the people I knew.  And one of these unknown partners was fascinated to hear about my line of work.

Now, contrary to what you might think, this is not a good sign.  Don’t get me wrong: I am thrilled beyond measure when I find someone “in the business” (i.e. the AML regulated community) who is as bewitched by AML as I am.  We can dissect the finer points of record-keeping, consider the ramifications of a wider PEP definition and a public register of beneficial ownership, debate the merits of the objective test, and generally have a high old time.  But when it’s a civilian, I am not so pleased.  Because I know what is coming.

First I will hear about how some ignorant, unfeeling, pettifogging and probably impotent bank/building society employee prevented them from doing something perfectly innocent by (the cad, the bounder) asking about the source of their money.  And then – seemingly unable to stop themselves – they will hint to me about that source.  Sometimes, all is well: their squeaky-clean maiden aunt (perhaps a nun) really did die and leave them a fortune.  But more often, there will be something just the slightest bit whiffy about it, and this is suggested by the words they use.  “Strictly speaking”, or “in some circumstances”, or – my particular favourite – “none of their damn business”.  So I listen and smile, craven creature that I am, and store the information away.  I think they think that I’m offering a sort of money laundering confessional service – that once they have told me, and I have smiled, they have received financial absolution.  It’s a theological matter that they can raise with the prison chaplain; after all, fourteen years should be long enough for that discussion.

Posted in AML, Money laundering, Tax | 7 Comments

Due diligence doodoo

You know how when you say any word over and over again, it starts to sound like nonsense, and then you lost confidence that you are saying or spelling it right, and finally it’s just gobbledegook?  Absorbed as I am in writing my new series of AML books (first four came out last week, for Guernsey – now working on the UK set), this has happened to me with the phrase “due diligence”.  I have written it so many times that I am no longer sure that it’s the right thing at all.

For a start, are we actually using a legal phrase without realising its significance?  (I was pulled up on this last week, during some training, when I said that the goal was to use “best endeavours” to get information.  “Best endeavours?” asked a lawyer in the group.  “Do you mean the legal standard of best endeavours, which is high?”  I hadn’t realised that “best endeavours” means something specific to the courts – I just liked the sound of it, and actually didn’t think that it was that high a standard.  Must be more careful in future – and in case you’re now wondering too, the law firm Clifford Chance has published a handy guide to the various endeavours.  Except Morse, of course.)  So maybe the phrase “due diligence” means something more specific that I imagine – although it does not appear in my law dictionary.

So if it’s just a phrase, how has it come about, apart from the pleasing alliteration and rhythm?  It may surprise you – and you might want to remind yourself of this as you wrestle with a recalcitrant customer relationship manager and his laughingly incomplete take-on forms – that the word “diligent” comes from the Latin diligere: to love or take delight in.  Oh the irony.  In other words, by exhibiting diligence, we are taking pleasure in being careful and conscientious in carrying out our duties.  Yes we are.  Honestly.  Don’t laugh/cry.  As for “due”, I do wonder to whom all of this diligence is due.  Actually, it’s not that sort of due: it’s the sort that means “proper” (as in “driving with due care and attention”) and “required as a moral and legal duty”.

So although I am almost overwhelmed by the temptation to replace “due diligence” with “alligator nostrils” or something equally nonsensical in the middle of one of my books, to see if anyone notices, I shall – with delight and duty – continue to recommend due diligence instead.

Posted in AML, Money laundering | Tagged , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

This little piggy went to Guernsey

I hope you will forgive me a little toot on my own horn (parp parp) but it’s not every week that I publish four books.  And I do need your help with a rather important decision.

Some while ago, you accompanied me on an e-publishing adventure as I coaxed my series of five books on AML for non-executive directors onto the bookshelves. I enjoyed it all so much that as one of my 2014 AML resolutions I conceived an even grander project: AML books for staff.  And this week sees the publication of the first four in the series.  “Anti-Money Laundering: What You Need to Know” is designed for general staff – rather than for MLROs or directors – and covers the central AML tenets of CDD, record-keeping, internal reporting and staff training, as well as an overview of the legislation, some case studies and red flag indicators, and links to further information.  The piggy proved so popular with NEDs that he agreed to pose once again on his beach, this time in a yellow outfit – and I have also commissioned (get me! I’m like Alan Yentob in a Boden dress) some cartoons from a chap who used to work at the Economist.  Only the best for my lovely readers.  The book is priced at a friendly £5.99, so I am hoping that MLROs might feel that they can purchase a few to scatter around.  Crucially, the yellow piggies are very specific – to both jurisdiction and sector.  So the first four (you can see them in their aurulent splendour here) are all for Guernsey: banking, accountancy, fiduciary and insurance editions.

Now this is where I need your help.  I am planning to do UK editions next, and I’m thinking: banking, accountancy, fiduciary and investment.  Then Jersey: banking, accountancy, fiduciary and investment again.  Then perhaps Isle of Man and perhaps Gibraltar.  Do you have any thoughts on jurisdictions and sectors that might be popular?  I have tended to leave the lawyers alone, as most seem to prefer reading books written by other lawyers – but I could be tempted.  Any suggestions or other feedback would be very welcome.

Posted in AML, Money laundering | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments