ACAMS CAMS-FCI Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

The analyst should clarify discrepancies noted in the customer’s declared profile given the downstream impact on the risk assessment. This is because discrepancies between the customer’s nature of business and the information on the business registry may indicate that the customer is not operating a legitimate business or is trying to conceal its true activities. The analyst should verify the customer’s identity, source of funds, and purpose of transactions to ensure that the customer’s risk profile is accurate and consistent with the Fl’s risk appetite.

References: Leading Complex Investigations Certificate, Module 2, page 9.

The best next steps for the investigator to take are:

A. Review the customer’s transaction history. This can help the investigator identify any patterns or anomalies in the customer’s account activity, such as changes in transaction volume, frequency, amount, source, destination, purpose, etc. The investigator can also compare the customer’s transaction history with their KYC profile and risk rating to assess if there are any discrepancies or inconsistencies.

C. Check internal KYC information. This can help the investigator verify the customer’s identity, business nature, ownership structure, expected activity, source of funds, etc. The investigator can also update or enhance the customer’s KYC information based on any new or relevant information obtained from other sources.

E Conduct adverse media and open-source searches on the customer’s background. This can help the investigator find out if there is any negative or adverse information about the customer in public data sources, such as news articles, social media posts, blogs, forums, etc. Adverse media and open-source searches can also provide additional context and insight into the customer’s reputation, behavior, associations, etc. The other options are incorrect because:

B. Request information from the internet service provider who hosts the website is not feasible, as it may require a legal process or a court order to obtain such information. Moreover, the internet service provider may not have or disclose any useful information about the website or its owner.

D. Research other customer accounts for transactions to the same website is not relevant, as it may not provide any meaningful information about the customer under investigation. Furthermore, it may violate the privacy and confidentiality of other customers who are not related to the investigation.

F. Identify if the customer has opened accounts in an urban city area is not helpful, as it may not have any bearing on the customer’s involvement in a drug or drug paraphernalia purchase. Additionally, it may not be possible to access or verify such information without the customer’s consent or authorization.

References:

Advanced CAMS-FCI Certification | ACAMS, Section 2: Investigating Financial Crimes, page 11

Leading Complex Investigations Certificate | ACAMS, Module 3: Conducting Research and Analysis, page 6

Adverse Media Screening - Using AI to Mitigate Risk

Legal requirements for adverse media screening - Thomson Reuters

Electronic client due diligence | Ethics helpsheets | ICAEW

6AMLD & FATF: Where Adverse Media Screening Fits In

Free Adverse Media Check | NameScan

The instruction that the person in charge of the broker-dealer should provide to their employees is to take notes on the questions and comments made by the agents (A). This is because taking notes can help the employees to recall and document what happened during the search warrant execution, which can be useful for legal or regulatory purposes. According to ACAMS3, “the FI should instruct its staff to cooperate with LE agents during a search warrant execution, but also to take notes of what is being searched, seized, or asked by the agents” (p. 35). The FI should also “keep copies of any documents or records that are taken by LE agents” (p. 35).

The other instructions are not correct. The person in charge of the broker-dealer should not instruct their employees to sign consent forms permitting the agents to search employees’ offices (B), as this is unnecessary and potentially risky, as the agents already have a valid search warrant that authorizes them to search the premises. The person in charge of the broker-dealer should not instruct their employees to provide agents with unlimited access to customers’ personal data ©, as this could violate privacy or data protection laws, as well as compromise customer trust and confidentiality. The person in charge of the broker-dealer should not instruct their employees to volunteer information not requested by the agents that they think may be useful (D), as this could interfere with the LE investigation or expose them to legal or regulatory risks.

References:

• Introduction to Transnational Organized Crime
• ACAMS Law Enforcement and Financial Crimes Investigations eLearning Course Module
• Law Enforcement Requests and Actions