Press | Events | Careers | Experian Group | Contact Us
 
foo Home > Business services > Current Customer Review > Appendix

Appendix 1 - Risk based approach definitions

Introduction
Background
What is required of you?
What does this really mean?
The best approach
Key issues
The Experian approach
Working with Experian
Next steps and contact details
Appendix
Useful links
Working with Experian - key stages
Working with Experian - benefits

The Current Customer Review Guidelines state that it is acceptable to operate a risk based approach to satisfying customer re-identification.

Risk group definition
The definition of risk groups is detailed in the table below.

  Personal customers Non-personal customers
High risk Bank statements to countries with weak AML.
Suspected or connected to a PEP.
Mail not sent to residential address
Non-UK registered
Money service businesses Defence/arms or gambling related business
Geographic activity in NCCTs
Off shore trusts
Med risk N/A Principal activity in non FATF countries
Annual amount credited is >£1m(or as agreed with FSA)
Low risk All other customers Annual amount credited is <£1m(or as agreed with FSA)Listed on a recognised stock exchange or partnership authorised by UK/FATF body

Timetable For project completion
The timetable to complete each risk group was stated on 15th July 2002 as:

  • High risk Customers – to be identified within 12 months

  • Medium risk customers within 24 months

  • Low risk customers by the end of 2004, with possible slippage to August 2005.

Identification levels according to risk grouping
For the 'Current Customer Review' the degree of diligence required to re-identify customers is dependent on procedures currently adopted for establishing customer identity, and the risk within each customers' account or the product line. This means that different levels of processing (across different portfolios of customers and between different banking organisations) will be required to comply with this initiative. The FSA have indicated the absolute minimum and the maximum requirements to be:

  • The minimum level of re-identification would involve a validity check against the
    current ER

  • The maximum would involve a procedure enabling financial service institutions to re-identify their existing customers to the level of diligence set out in the JMLSG Guidance Notes for new customers. In short, the solution should be compliant with the following:

    • No single document or source of data can be used to establish identity

    • As an alternative or supplementary to documentary evidence of the identity and address, the applicant's identity, address and other information may be checked electronically by accessing one or more data sources

    • True full name and/or names used and current permanent address, including postcode should be independently validated for all private individuals whose identity needs to be verified

    • A risk based approach as to what is reasonable in the circumstances can be adopted when obtaining satisfactory evidence of the identity

    • Procedures should exist to guard against impersonations, invented identities and the use of false addresses.. If the application is non-face to face, one or more additional measures should be undertaken