James Stunts business’ raided, days after brothers death

[sugerbear]

SpeckledJim said:

sugerbear said:

SpeckledJim said:

z4RRSchris said:

rustyuk said:

How the hell did they think depositing £1.7 million in cash a day would go unnoticed.

amusingly it wasn't unnoticed, but Natwest did fk all about it, which is why they got fined nearly £300m

"
When it first took on Fowler Oldfield, NatWest initially understood it would not handle cash from the business and that its annual turnover would be around £15m.

However,?over the course of the relationship approximately £365m was deposited with the bank, of which around £264m was in cash. At its height, Fowler Oldfield was depositing £1.8m in cash across multiple branches every day.

Staff at the Walsall branch reported in 2015 that thousands of pounds in cash was brought into the branch uncounted in big black bin liners; the weight was so great that the bags would break and staff had to move the cash into stronger hessian sacks.

The prosecution highlighted a litany of failures by both people and technology at NatWest, despite some staff raising internal reports of suspicious activity.

A separate investigation by West Yorkshire Police has led to 11 people pleading guilty to charges relating to the cash deposits and three cash couriers being charged. A further 13 individuals are awaiting trial next year.
"

I don't understand how a provincial PAYE Bank Manager doesn't immediately see his career flash before his eyes when this spectacular sort of thing happens whilst his tellers are patiently counting out £5 for Doris and Deirdre at the next counter.

As long as the provincial bank manager has reported the concern they are effectively off the hook if it's subsequently found that the money was being laundered through their branch. The requirement is to report not to refuse.

Plus branch managers don't sit looking at their tills all day, they are spending their time trying to find new business.

If nothing is done then those deposits will show as a positive for their revenue target because cash costs money to bank.

So they can either carry on taking cash even if it looks dodgy or they can end up on a performance management plan for failing to meet revenue targets.

Well fair enough, but a £300m fine makes a bit of a dent in one's profit targets.

Seems folk are being incentivised to do the wrong things.

That is the cost of doing business I suppose. I wonder how much they saved over ten years by not implementing / underfunding or just not having a robust process/people in place. Plus that money only comes from the revenue not from the top line profits.

[J4CKO]

"He is not the Wolf of Wall Street, He is Rubbish" in a Ukrainian accent.

He always looks off his tits, which is understandable but just seems to be one of those blokes who will do literally anything for money and status. He reminds me of Christian Slater blended with Harry Enfields Tory Boy, and if there is a film Jonah Hill would play him pretty well.

Bradford, no surprises, would love to see the tax take from Bradford, prob about a tenner There are cash businesses, thats a Cash City.

If the takeaways want cash only they are evading tax, if they are never really open, gladly take cards when they are and take 100 grand in a week for a small Fried Chicken Joint then they are laundering money, wonder if they switch back and forth ?

[austinsmirk]

the live trial is actually here

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/201193...


its been fascinating to read !

I'm taking a guess, but I think they'll be found guilty.

[limpsfield]

austinsmirk said:

the live trial is actually here

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/201193...


its been fascinating to read !

I'm taking a guess, but I think they'll be found guilty.

Great read, thanks!

[AstonZagato]

sugerbear said:

As long as the provincial bank manager has reported the concern they are effectively off the hook if it's subsequently found that the money was being laundered through their branch. The requirement is to report not to refuse.

Indeed. If one has a suspicion, one must report it to the institution's AML officer. That then puts you in the clear and makes it their problem.

One must NOT tell the client that one has reported a concern. In fact it is an offence to do so - tipping off - which carries two years in jail and a fine.

[Louis Balfour]

AstonZagato said:

sugerbear said:

As long as the provincial bank manager has reported the concern they are effectively off the hook if it's subsequently found that the money was being laundered through their branch. The requirement is to report not to refuse.

Indeed. If one has a suspicion, one must report it to the institution's AML officer. That then puts you in the clear and makes it their problem.

One must NOT tell the client that one has reported a concern. In fact it is an offence to do so - tipping off - which carries two years in jail and a fine.

I was reported for money laundering by our local HSBC counter manager some years ago. I didn't find out about it until I submitted a SAR on another matter.

I wasn't laundering money. He was ginger and confused.

[Carl_Manchester]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

fking hell.