Primary tabs

TaylorWessing e|n|w|c E. Stobiecka, Kancelaria prawna sp. k.

General remark – as the internal policies and procedures should be risk-based, either the ‘Guidelines on the use of remote customer onboarding’ or the ‘The ML/TF Risk Factors Guidelines’ should be supplemented with the list of potential risk factors concerning the remote-onboarding process for example the behavioral factors concerning the client.
i. Section 4.4. point 38 ‘Remote customer onboarding solutions implemented by the financial sector operators should, as a minimum, allow them to verify the validity of official documents issued by a public authority’.

It should be elaborated what is meant by the validity of the official documents issued by a public authority. This word, used in this context may not be clear, especially in the context of the natural person that represents a legal entity with a registered office in other Member State. It should be clearly confirmed that in such case presentation of electronic excerpts/certificates confirming capacity to act on behalf of a given legal entity is sufficient and that it is not necessary to present excerpts/certificates confirmed by e.g. public notary if there are no doubts to their content/authenticity. Otherwise, onboarding may become very burdensome and not effective.

ii. Section 4.4. point 42 ‘In situations where the evidence provided is of insufficient quality resulting in ambiguity or uncertainty so that the performance of remote checks is affected, the individual remote customer onboarding process should be discontinued and redirected, where possible, to a face-to-face verification, in the same physical location’

The recommendation according to which in case it is impossible to carry out the remote onboarding process in accordance with the requirements set in the Guidelines it should be redirected to a face-to-face verification should be considered justified.

However, the requirement that such a face-to-face verification should take place ‘in the same physical location’ seems to be redundant and unjustified, as well as it constitutes a significant obstacle for both financial sector operators and their customers.

Also it is unclear what should be understood under the term “the same physical location”. Should it be understood as:
a. the location in which the customer was during the remote verification process; or
b. the nearest establishment of the financial sector operator to the physical location of the customer; or
c. the establishment of the financial sector operator from which the remote onboarding process was conducted?
The requirement of conducting the face-to-face verification in the same physical location should be deleted or clarified.

iii. Section 4.4. point 46 – the catalogue of the controls used by the financial sector operators in order to additionally verify the customer during the remote onboarding shall be further developed for example by addition of the geolocation.
TaylorWessing e|n|w|c E. Stobiecka, Kancelaria prawna sp. k.