Tales From the Field: Do Banks Lie When Served with Documents Subpoenas in Fraud & Asset Recovery Inquiries?
'Following the money' requires access to electronic funds credit and debit advices, checks and other payment records. Without these records, victims of fraud can be deprived of justice. Their suppression or destruction can demolish any meaningful chance that a victim might have to obtain restorative civil justice.
What do banks do when they are served with a subpoena? Do they lie and suppress records? Or do they have systemic policies in place intended to suppress the truth? If a bank may be sued for facilitating a fraud, why do banks take the position that their AML compliance records are not discoverable?
These and other controversial questions will be debated by this panel.
- Document retention rules internal and external to a bank.
- What do fraud investigators do if the bank says that it destroys all records within a finite period of time as permitted by local banking regulations?
- Do banks preserve data offsite for disaster storage purposes notwithstanding what they tell fraud investigators?
- The use of expert reports to establish what backup systems preserve in contrast to what they disclose.
Managing Partner, Martin Kenney & Co., Solicitors (BVI)
Shareholder, Astigarraga Davis (Miami)