Apparantly she is doing what they are asking, but is running them against the account list. She has nothing to do with the accounting department which takes care of wires. I have a feeling that I have a big issue to attend to here. But try taking away or changing someones job that they have been doing FOREVER. Not fun.

We use imaging, and routinely put text (report) files on our imaging system. We can then do a text-string search on a range of dates. We plan to take this same approach with our wire activity by copying our Fedline transactions out to daily text files and loading them to the imaging system.

Please DO send this to them! I think they need to know just how many of us are upset about the volume of requests and the depth of search we must perform.

Before everyone gathers a lynching mob to go after FinCEN we need to remember that FinCEN is only the conduit through which these info requests are sent to us. The originators are various law enforcement agencies (check each cover letter and you will see where the request came from.)

That said, I was not thrilled to see six of these requests in my email box this morning either!!!

Could be that FinCEN just got this process up and running, so all the law enforcement agencies are now beginning to give the the list of names that they've been wanting to check forever to them to send out.

We too only have paper trails for wires. But starting today we are putting them into a spreadsheet! (The few minutes a day it will take to do that will save me days, if not months, of work in the long run!)

But as one of my coworkers said FINCEN is creating job security in a tough market!

Are any of you getting duplications in the requests? I received 12 copies of what appears to be the same name/person. The tracking number on the top corner is the same, and the first few I have checked have identical information (name, address, ssn). I will check all copies closely, but is anyone else having this problem?

Without adequate controls - this is going to be the largest fishing event in American history. Maybe somebody should call Curt Gowdy (oh - did I date myself). Seriously, FINCEN needs to be informed of the issues, industry groups need to insist that they implement searches geographically, only suspect money launderers and terrorists are subject to searches, etc.

We can check or CIF (deposit, loan, safe deposit) files with quick searches. Wires are not as automated as they should be so it is a search through the actual wire forms for the last six months. (That will change soon.) The negotiable instrument logs are hand written and are at each individual branch. This will have to be changed if these requests continue.

By all means, please send this thread. Here in Wyoming we don't see too many suspected terrorists although I guess it could be possible. This is taking way too much of my time doing research on someone from Hong Kong.

They're still coming in. 4 this morning plus 2 more at last count.

I think a plan of action may be to wait and accumulate a few days worth rather than reacting to each with any sense of urgency.

I emailed the following. Don't know if it will help, but it can't hurt either.

Dear Senators Lugar and Bayh and Congressman Hostettler:

Under the United States of America Patriots Act (USAPA) 314.(a) banks are required to share information with government agencies in an effort to protect our country from known and alleged terrorist activity. As I am sure you are well aware of, all bankers are and have been in support of this for some time and have no misgivings about assisting in this important issue to help protect our great nation.

However, under the recent move by FINCEN enacting section 314(a) and sending, what appears to be random and sometime duplicate lists, to all banks to search their records for suspected terrorist is putting an undue hardship on some banks. It appears FINCEN has deputized the banks as their agents to do their “leg” work for them.

I am asking your assistance in relaying our concerns to FINCEN. My suggestions are:

All banks are currently required to compare their new customers at account opening, and existing customer at least once per year, against the OFAC list, therefore, add the suspected names to the OFAC list and let the banks process their inquiries against this list. If need be, require the banks to “scrub” their account base on a quarterly basis.

Discontinue these “daily” lists. Instead of sending “daily” lists; to send them on the 15th and 30th of each month. This will still be burdensome for the banks, but at least they will be able to prepare knowing they will be receiving a list at a certain time of each month.

Most banks are automated to check the OFAC list, however these new FINCEN requests require many banks to do manual searches and are putting undue hardships on their personnel.

I would encourage you to please visit this compliance thread at Bankers Online, it will demonstrate some of the concerns that bankers nationwide are sharing concerning FINCEN’s action:

link to thread removed for this posting.

Thank you,
Dan Persfull

Thank you, Dan. Good job.

You're welcome and thank you.

Where did you find out that we only have 7 days to research the names????? I must have missed something. thanks

Look in the box on the bottom of the 2nd page of the cover letter.

The 7 day response time on a match is referenced on the bottom right hand side of each of the suspect info forms.

Thank you for pointing this out. I did not even catch the required time frame and neither did my BSA officer. There is no way for us to research these within seven days. I am not complaining, it is just a fact. There is too much manual research involved to complete within seven days. We need to hire another person just to handle BSA, USA Patriot, OFAC, Control Lists and now FinCEN. I am very patriotic and I always want to do my part to assist the financial system of our country, but I am also realistic. There has to be a BETTER way!

Opinions are mine and not my employer.

So, is everyone else checking purchasers of Traveler Checks and Payee's on Cashier Checks?

I've been working under the illusion that if we need to check purchasers and payees on Cashier's Checks it would only be for those purchased with cash in amounts of $3,000 and more. Someone correct me quickly if I'm wrong and I'll spend the eveing polishing my resume. This is just about the final straw for my tired mind.

Forgot to say, my COO told me to seek out some software that could help with these requests. I told him I thought it would be too soon - but does anyone know of anything under development that could help - maybe something related to software to check against OFAC and the FBI control list?

nga - you are correct on the recordkeeping rules for bank checks (Cashier's, Money Orders, Travelers) - You only need to keep records for those items from $3,000 to $10,000 that are puchased with cash.

Our problem is that our Teller System records ALL of these items, and we don't have a way of filtering for an amount range and payment method. In addition, no one has been able to figure out how to EXPORT the database into Excel or Access. So for now, the Ops folks have printed out the log and are reviewing manually.

Thankfully our open and closed accounts and wire transfers can be searched electronically.

It appears you may want to do one of two things:
1. Institute a policy that you will not accept a straight CASH purchase for these items. Instead, the customer must deposit to their account and either write a check or a withdrawal form to purchase the item.

OR

2. Set up an Excel spreadsheet for your branches to record cash purchases for checks. Make sure every branch uses the same format. That way, you can combine them all into one spreadsheet and use the "Find" tool in Excel to search.

Seems like the regulators did not do us a favor when they did away with the "formal" log requirement for these items. So everyone who said "Yay" and went to keeping the "record" on the file copy of the check is now crying the blues.

With respect to a "software" solution, most of the current OFAC screening software will allow you to build your own database of names that you want to check. The trick is getting your customer data base, wire transfer records, and bank check records into a format that you can run through the software. You must be able to export to a text ASCII file.

I PTL that we got our imaging software up and running last year! And that we only need to check wires for the last 6 mos. We have at least 14 months imaged, which makes searching for originators and beneficiaries easier that shuffling thru the hard copy forms. BUT...I think I am going to need a stronger prescription for my glasses!

I down load the FinCEN file nightly and import it into a Microsoft Access Database that allow me to do a search on the name in a matter of seconds.

We received a number of requests from all over the country. We're in Louisiana and these requests are coming in from NY, IL, CA. We immediately checked our CIF's and found no such names. According to the Form B, if no match is found, no response is necessary. Is this your understanding, also? I agree, FinCen has got to do a better job of directing these requests to the appropriate sources. Maybe the info they are receiving from law enforcement should be reviewed more thoroughly before blanketing the banks with mis-directed requests for info.
We could spend literally thousands of hours searching for a needle that does not exist. We need help with this if the banks are to make a meaningful contribution to this effort.