Common-sense KYC: Customers should supply the knowledge
By 
Martin Woods2020-08-07T15:39:00
No one knows a customer better than the customer. As such, financial crime expert Martin Woods believes the onus should be on the customer to provide the required data to keep KYC logs up to date.
Related articles
-
ArticleBest practices KYC: What to do when your client is in the headlines
How do we, as AML professionals, assess negative media alerts? It should start with a conversation with the client relationship manager, but it shouldn’t end there, writes Martin Woods.
-
Article‘I don’t know’ is among a compliance officer’s strongest statements
Martin Woods explains how saying “I don’t know” helped him to learn and elicit the truth during his time as a financial crime compliance officer.
-
ArticleHat tip to HSBC for stopping money laundering, saving lives
If you’re in search of proof that what you do matters, look no further than the AML efforts of HSBC in preventing $500 million from reaching the bank accounts of criminals, writes Martin Woods.
More from Opinion
-
OpinionAI adoption without trust: A call for compliance professionals
Employees are adopting AI faster than companies can build policies, governance, and training. That gap creates compliance exposure in areas from data privacy to shadow IT to workplace equity.
-
NewsThe Banks behind Jeffrey Epstein: Why the story matters now more than ever
The Epstein case remains a defining moment for financial institutions. As new investigations bring renewed attention to his enablers, Compliance Week’s 2024 case study offers not only a timeline of failures but a path forward. Here’s what banks, regulators, and compliance teams must learn from it.
-
OpinionA friend for the compliance officer: Co-thinking with AI
At their core, compliance officers are problem-solvers. They wrestle with thorny questions every day: How do we implement a global gifts-and-entertainment policy across jurisdictions with vastly different cultural norms? How do we balance business pressures with anti-corruption obligations? How do we address new risks like AI itself?