“The bank had lax controls and relied on untrained personnel, including a chief compliance officer who wasn’t familiar with anti-money-laundering rules.” Knew or should have known!
On top of that government employees that are not prepared properly – doesn’t that qualify for a Title 42 sec. 1983 lawsuit?
New York’s top financial regulator slapped a “Panama Papers”-linked bank with a $180 million fine for anti-money laundering violations.
Mega Bank, a $103 billion Taiwanese bank with one New York office, ignored the risks associated with transactions involving Panama, a high-risk area for money laundering, the state Department of Financial Services said in a statement on Friday.
The bank had “suspicious” accounts that were formed with the help of Mossack Fonseca, the law firm at the center of the “Panama Papers” leak, which revealed companies and wealthy individuals who dodged taxes, the DFS said.
> On top of that government employees that are not prepared properly – doesn’t that qualify for a Title 42 sec. 1983 lawsuit?
No. § 1983 applies to constitutional / civil rights violations committed by State government officers / agents / employees that injury individual people & you’d have to prove an “injury”. In other words, it’s not enough to allege that certain gov’t. employees didn’t do their jobs properly, were negligent, incompetent, whatever, you’d have to show how YOU were injured by their actions made “under color of state law”. For example, a law-enforcement officer beating someone who’s already in handcuffs 1/2 to death, or shooting an unarmed person who posed no threat — the injured individuals could file suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for actions like that. There are many, many more, but a bank officer who didn’t know the law about money laundering isn’t one of ’em.