Why Absa dumped the Guptas

[Jan]

Why Absa dumped the Guptas

Financial services provider Absa said in a responding affidavit filed in the North Gauteng High Court on Thursday it started its review into the bank accounts linked to the Gupta-owned companies in November 2014 already as part of its annual review into politically exposed people.

 

[Bryn]

TL;DR:

Absa said it is compelled by law to implement specific controls to combat money laundering.

The bank said that guidance notes relating to the Financial Intelligence Centre Act sets out that the controls and mechanisms to identify high risk customers would include “politically exposed people” (PEPs).

According to Absa the reason for the required on-going enhanced due diligence requirement in relation to PEPs and their close associates is because of the higher money laundering risk that PEPs pose.

“The risks associated with PEPs are that by virtue of their position and the influence they hold, PEPs may be misused to conceal funds or assets which have been obtained illegally through the misappropriation of public funds or as a result of (their) power and influence.”

Same reason as Standard then, and probably all the other banks.

 

[sajunky]

If bank had any evidence of concealing funds or assets, it should inform authorities, but not closing accounts without notice. Bank made purely political decision on dealing with some politically linked individuals and I think they crossed the line. If Zuma camp survive, ABSA will be forced to sell their assets.

 

[Sinbad]

If bank had any evidence of concealing funds or assets, it should inform authorities, but not closing accounts without notice. Bank made purely political decision on dealing with some politically linked individuals and I think they crossed the line. If Zuma camp survive, ABSA will be forced to sell their assets.

Rubbish.
There are strict rules on dealing with a PEP. Cross the line and the bank can be in deep ****. Closing accounts is the least I'd expect. It doesn't have to be based on suspect transactions. It's about risk profile.

 

[Petec]

Jan, you said dump... *childish chortle*

Ironically though, this is exactly what I think of when visualising what the zuptas have done to SA.

 

[sajunky]

Rubbish.
There are strict rules on dealing with a PEP. Cross the line and the bank can be in deep ****. Closing accounts is the least I'd expect. It doesn't have to be based on suspect transactions. It's about risk profile.

Bulls$(t. Government has a right to evaluate how a business is is dealing with their customers, banks are not excluded.

Media influence people and hidden agenda is behind. They let people think that Guptas are evil, Zuma is a showerhead, etc. We talk about Zuma swimming pool and media let us forget that the same story started developing about Mbeki house. After Mbeki resigned nobody is interested in millions of Rands spent on this house from the public money. It is better when banks stop talking about money laundering, closing bank accounts without sufficient evidence. They must bring the matter to the authorities, it is the only thing they are required by law. As they did more, they will pay for it.

 

[Sinbad]

Bulls$(t. Government has a right to evaluate how a business is is dealing with their customers, banks are not excluded.

Media influence people and hidden agenda is behind. They let people think that Guptas are evil, Zuma is a showerhead, etc. We talk about Zuma swimming pool and media let us forget that the same story started developing about Mbeki house. After Mbeki resigned nobody is interested in millions of Rands spent on this house from the public money. It is better when banks stop talking about money laundering, closing bank accounts without sufficient evidence. They must bring the matter to the authorities, it is the only thing they are required by law. As they did more, they will pay for it.

Lol
I work for a bank.
I have done the compulsory kyc training that all staff must undergo. I know what I'm talking about.
Just Google pep and kyc to see how real this is. Money laundering is only a tiny part of it.

 

[sajunky]

Lol
I work for a bank.
I have done the compulsory kyc training that all staff must undergo. I know what I'm talking about.
Just Google pep and kyc to see how real this is. Money laundering is only a tiny part of it.

So you decide when to close people's accounts without warning. Interesting...

 

[Sinbad]

So you decide when to close people's accounts without warning. Interesting...

Go educate yourself.you will indeed find it interesting.
Banks are businesses. Right of admission reserved and all that.

 

[crackersa]

So you decide when to close people's accounts without warning. Interesting...

It's in the t&c's

 

[sajunky]

It's in the t&c's

Yes and this is a problem. It is a basic service and cannot be denied to individuals. You can't get paid salary without bank account and you will be unable to pay people's salary having closed bank account like it was in this case. Bank made political decision with disregard to suffering by many who were employed by the company. No notice, no reasoning.

If Guptas were involved in illegally looking transaction, bank should notify authorities about the fact, but bank failed to do that, so it is discrimination based on social or political affiliation. It is clearly violating constitutional rights, disguisting act, similar to racism.

 

[crackersa]

Yes and this is a problem. It is a basic service and cannot be denied to individuals. You can't get paid salary without bank account and you will be unable to pay people's salary having closed bank account like it was in this case. Bank made political decision with disregard to suffering by many who were employed by the company. No notice, no reasoning.

If Guptas were involved in illegally looking transaction, bank should notify authorities about the fact, but bank failed to do that, so it is discrimination based on social or political affiliation. It is clearly violating constitutional rights, disguisting act, similar to racism.

Your company can write you a check and you can go to the company bank to cash it.

Second.....the bank is protecting it's interests and has the right to do business with whom ever they want as long as they don't discriminate based on sex, race, religion, etc.

Interesting that you protect the Gupta.

Edit - and it's not the banks responsibility to worry about the Gupta employees. That's the Gupta responsibility.

 

[j4ck455]

Gupta sycophants are a rare breed that conveniently ignores the list of 72 suspicious transactions that were reported collectively by the various banks to the FIC (relevant authority) and SARB.

 

[sajunky]

Your company can write you a check and you can go to the company bank to cash it.

Certainly, company with closed accounts can write checks. .LOL. You don't understand what you wrote.

Second.....the bank is protecting it's interests and has the right to do business with whom ever they want as long as they don't discriminate based on sex, race, religion, etc.

Add here: social or political affiliation, you have a picture.

 

[crackersa]

Certainly, company with closed accounts can write checks. .LOL. You don't understand what you wrote.

Add here: social or political affiliation, you have a picture.

You don't understand your own writing. You said if you don't have an account how can you recieve your salary...

Edit...
Went back and read your post again. But I see what you mean.....


My view still stands....Guptas problem...shouldn't have been corrupt. As another poster said....70 odd suspicious transactions that were reported

 

[Vrotappel]

Bulls$(t. Government has a right to evaluate how a business is is dealing with their customers, banks are not excluded.

Media influence people and hidden agenda is behind. They let people think that Guptas are evil, Zuma is a showerhead, etc. We talk about Zuma swimming pool and media let us forget that the same story started developing about Mbeki house. After Mbeki resigned nobody is interested in millions of Rands spent on this house from the public money. It is better when banks stop talking about money laundering, closing bank accounts without sufficient evidence. They must bring the matter to the authorities, it is the only thing they are required by law. As they did more, they will pay for it.

This is all about risk and how a business mitigates it. Banks took the right decision under the circumstances. It was pretty clever from PG to preempt the whole process by approaching the court. Courts will side with PG and the banks on this one.

 

[scudsucker]

Yes and this is a problem. It is a basic service and cannot be denied to individuals. You can't get paid salary without bank account and you will be unable to pay people's salary having closed bank account like it was in this case.

Absolute nonsense.
1) Access to banking is not a right, and it most certainly can be denied to individuals, companies and even governments.

2) You can get paid if you do not have a bank account: real hard cash is still an option.

3) The Guptas apparently have sufficient real hard cash, they've just used it for bribes rather than salaries.

 

[sajunky]

My view still stands....Guptas problem...shouldn't have been corrupt. As another poster said....70 odd suspicious transactions that were reported

You are wrong again. It is not about Guptas. It is about customers rights

 

[crackersa]

You are wrong again. It is not about Guptas. It is about customers rights

Oh so we should let business and people be corrupt and risk our business's for them?

 

[sajunky]

1) Access to banking is not a right, and it most certainly can be denied to individuals, companies and even governments.

Be careful what you say. When we look from the other side, bankers who do not treat customers fair might find better business prospects with foreign governments.