Ok, this might be a very easy questions but I have drawn a blank. If the bank files a SAR on a customer for structuring their transactions to evade CTRs, how can the bank put a stop to this? The transactions are different in nature-deposits and withdrawals.

Yes - it's called closing the account.

Provide the customer with the structuring brochure.
That works sometimes.

Is there any other way?

Obviously we do not know for sure if this customer is actually doing this but since it looks like it, SARs have been filed.

This really calls for a face to face with the customer. Go over the FinCEN Brochure and get them to acknowledge they understand what structuring is. Be diplomatic. You will know real fast by their reaction if it is intentional or they do not understand.

I agree that "customer counseling" accompanied by the delivery of FinCEN's CTR pamphlet is a reasonable response. However, some individual examiners think that any bank communication that alters a customer's behavior is inappropriate. From my perspective, the communication is appropriate, but needs to be conducted by someone who keep the conversation within boundaries about the customer's behavior and not speculate about what the bank is going to do about it, other than the possibility it might close the account.

Prior thread.

Glad I found this post. We do not keep FinCEN's CTR pamphlet readily available in our branches but sometimes ask that they 'counsel' the customer and provide the pamphlet. The hard part sometimes is trying to 'coach' the branch on what they can and cannot say to the customer. Any advice?

We were advised to give the customer the CTR brochure but let it speak for itself. You may keep some in a take one stand by the teller line and see who kept it to read it. Branch employees should not accuse anyone of structuring but merely point out that since they have been depositing frequent cash lately, they may want to review the brochure. And then let your BSA officer know that you have provided that to the customer. That way, they can document on their SAR that the customer was provided the brochure and still structured or that they were provided the brochure and structuring stopped.

An examiner shouldn't cite you for using FinCEN's own document that they created for that purpose. That's just silly.

"The way that you are depositing cash [illustrate] makes it harder for our system to report the transactions. (We do report it whether you deposit all on the same day or at the same time or not.) Would you please stop it? It's making unnecessary work for us."

"If you don't understand our reporting requirement, here's a brochure that explains it. Just deposit all of your cash receipts on the same day at the same time. It should be easier for you too!"

This makes you sound a little slow (or like you write for the CFPB). However, it gives them an inkling that you may not be as slow as they thought. Don't let the conversation expand to how your system works. If necessary, just stay in the same vein and say you don't know how it it works, just that it does work. No mention of "how" you report it when they structure, just a simple statement that you do report it.

There are some good comments in the thread linked above.

Thank you so much!

We get a customer profile sheet filled out by the customer at account opening. This profile asks the customer what types of deposits they typically have, the estimated amount per week, etc? We would typically compare the customers activity with that sheet. If the activity is not matching, this may lead to asking the customer to address this form again and update if needed. This would then probably give us the information that we need to verify if the deposit amounts are related to structuring or a valid reason. Don't know if this is something that you all are doing but it has proven a valuable tool for us.

Information supplied by the customer to populate a customer profile is like a state trooper pulling over a motorist to ask "How fast were you going?" and deciding whether to ticket based on the answer instead of what the radar gun or the trooper's speedometer said.

Getting customer input at account opening is one way to set a starting point for monitoring, but if cash patterns suggest structuring, I would not accept the customer's statement that the pattern is "normal for the business" without some corroboration -- similar businesses, traffic observation, etc.

John, I agree and disagree. I agree that we cannot just accept a customer's statement of what is "normal" for them. But, I also think that sometimes we can get input from a customer that will make something that seems abnormal make perfect sense. Our profile sheets are not an end all, be all for us but are just a starting point. We can find out from a customer what their normal weekly deposit amount would be. For example, we have a customer who manages rental properties. Most of these properties are in lower income areas and most tennants pay in cash. So, every couple of weeks this customer deposits a few thousand in cash. This could seem unusual if we didn't know the circumstances. Now, if his cash deposits all of a sudden spike, then we would contact him and "update his profile sheet". Then we can find out where the additional cash is coming from. Updating the profile sheet gives us that conversation opener to obtain information from the customer.

I am with John on this one (big suprise) the customer could be setting you up with the information given at account opening.

I do agree with what you are saying in a sense. I think that you also may be thinking that we are being more naive that what we are. We also review the information provided, compare to other like business in the area (if it is commercial), etc. We also do proper CIP verification and obtain the documentation verifying existence of business. If a customer is saying that they are going to have a certain amount of cash deposits, we ask why and document and keep on file. All of our customers with large amounts of cash are marked as high risk and monitored CLOSELY. We do annual site visits of high risk customers as well to monitor whether they seem to be generating the business to support the cash deposits, etc. The profile sheet just gives us a starting point to understand more about their activity (especially new customers). It also helps us with starting a conversation with customers in which we want to ask "why are you doing this?"
We can agree to disagree but this work for us. I am highly confident that we are doing our proper due dilligence and not just taking a customers word for it. If you don't have someone doing the necessary due diligence and monitoring on these customers in addition to the profile sheets then it would not be sufficient.

I don't think we are on different pages on this, MJoyner. You've explained how your bank handles these things and I think it fits my paradigm. A better way for me to have made my point, I suspect, is to suggest you "Trust, but verify."

Yes, John you're right. I totally see your point. I just wanted you to see mine:) A little healthy discussion never hurts. Thanks!