The confidentiality of SARs is a known fact. But how does one respond to a subpoena from law enforcement, which requests a copy of the SAR. Don't they have access to the SAR database?

According to the regs, you cannot let them know whether a SAR was or was not filed. If they did their homework, they would know if a SAR was filed. Is this just their way of obtaining the supporting information for the SAR?

Based on what the regs say, the bank has to respond with "I don't know anything." If you respond with this, it makes it seem as though you don't want to co-operate.

Your opinions or experiences are appreciated!

Also, did they provide you with a Certificate of Compliance? I am just curious as to how many are actually doing this.

A tough one. Clearly, if the subpoena was from other than law enforcement you cannot comply and should answer to the effect, "Whether or not a SAR was filed cannot be disclosed per federal law. If filed, a copy cannot be provided in response to this subpoena, per federal law." There is case law out there to support you on this.

But this is a subpoena from law enforcement who otherwise should have access to it. I believe the SAR law says it can be provided to local law enforcement. So whether it's a subpoena from the FBI or your local Barney Fife, I'd give it to them. In fact, it's good that you're getting a subpoena as you're now not limited to just providing the "evidence" referenced in the original SAR.

Can OCC request to see your SAR's Filed and do you give it to them?

Your regulator has the right to see any and all files, etc. in your bank. It's part of their supervision of you. If you're not regulated by the OCC - then I don't think they have the right to see it.

No, since this was a criminal investigation a C of C was not given.

How about this one: I was testifying in Federal Court last week, and the Defense Attorney asked me if a SAR had been filed on his client? What did I say? I told the Judge that Federal law prohibited me from answering that question. The Judge threatened to hold me in contempt...the U.S. Attorney was not aware if I could or couldn't disclose that info...we ultimately worked it out.

Could I have disclosed that information to the Defense Attorney, with his client sitting right there ????? An interesting dilemma !!!

What about internal auditors or independent third-pary auditors.. they do not have a right to see the sar's?? correct or not??

If you have contracted with them to perform an audit of that function, I'm not sure how they could do it without having access to the SAR's. Of course, you have a confidentiality clause in your contract with them.

Internal auditors could be employees - there's no prohibition against allowing employees access to the SAR's - within reason of course.

I think I would had replied, “Your Honor, again I repeat that Federal Law prevents me from divulging that information, however it is your prerogative to hold me in contempt of court for not doing so, however when it is determined I abided by the Law, it is also my prerogative to sue the court for wrongful imprisonment.”

How did you work it out?

After I refused to answer the question, the U.S. Attorney Stated: "Your Honor, on behalf of the U.S. Attorney's Office, we will assure Mr. Security Guy that we would not pursue any charges against him for disclosing the filing of a SAR in this matter." I figured that I was relatively safe in answering the question. But then the Judge countered: "If a SAR filing was required by Federal law, than I think we can safely assume what Mr. Security Guy's answer would be." So I never did answer the question.

Security Guy:

So, you never had to answer the question? They just left it hanging? Just like an attorney-never a straight answer!

Your example certainly gives me no faith in the safe harbor provision!!!

Never, NEVER get smucky with a judge. You may have the law on your side, but they can make your life miserable if they don't like your attitude.

It is like when you are pulled over by a cop. You don't say, "You #@*!. Why are you stopping me?", you say "Excuse me, Officer, is there a problem?"

I understand completely (you can't say the things on the witness stand that you really would like to), that was just a weak attempt at humor.