Independent legal information. This website is not affiliated with LSEG, World-Check, Refinitiv, LexisNexis or any screening provider. Eligibility, remedies and outcomes depend on law and evidence.
High-net-worth onboarding and enhanced due diligence
Enhanced due diligence is not itself a finding of misconduct. The bank may legitimately need reliable information about wealth generation, control of corporate entities and geographic exposure. An erroneous external profile can complicate that process but may not be the sole issue.
Reviewing source-of-wealth and PEP concerns
We would organise the identity, ownership and source-of-wealth record, review any identifiable inaccuracies and assist the legal team in presenting consistent documentary explanations to the institution.
Private-banking records for professional assessment
| Document or record | Why it may help |
|---|---|
| Bank onboarding checklist | Establishes the relevant dates and identities |
| Source-of-wealth narrative and substantiation | Tests what the decision-maker actually recorded |
| UBO and corporate structure | Supports an objective factual comparison |
| Any PEP or adverse-media materials | Shows a later event or possible consequence |
No institution is obliged to accept every client
Services must not promise guaranteed admission to a particular bank or a bypass of required enhanced due diligence.
Evidence expectations for complex wealth
| Issue | Examples of legitimate supporting material |
|---|---|
| Operating business wealth | Audited accounts, sale agreements, tax documents |
| Inheritance or family assets | Probate, inheritance and trust records |
| Investment gains | Statements and acquisition history |
| Corporate control | Registers, shareholder agreements and ownership chart |
The appropriate evidence set should be tailored to the specific bank request and privacy risks.
Two different decisions may need attention
A screening data provider can review the accuracy of its own record. A bank or regulated institution makes a separate decision about its customer relationship. The first outcome does not automatically determine the second.
Private banking refusals often turn on the quality of the narrative
Private banks conduct extensive customer due diligence. A complex shareholder history, family wealth transfer, international company structure or politically exposed relationship can generate questions even where no wrongdoing is alleged. The issue is not to convince a bank to disregard risk, but to provide clear, lawful and evidenced explanations and address any inaccurate screening information.
A source-of-wealth narrative needs traceable links
| Client explanation | What may corroborate it |
|---|---|
| Sale of an operating company | Sale agreement, closing statement, corporate accounts |
| Inheritance or family transfer | Probate or inheritance documents, lawful transfer history |
| Investment proceeds | Broker statements and transaction history |
| Dividends and salary | Employer/company records, financial statements, tax records as relevant |
| Historic public office | Appointment record, end date, conflict-of-interest disclosures where relevant |
Review the bank's actual request
A generic pack of hundreds of pages is less helpful than a structured explanation responding to each question. Create an index that maps the bank's request to a document, date and factual proposition. Reconcile currency conversions, corporate names and cross-border transfers. Make clear when a document does not exist and why, rather than filling gaps with speculative assurances.
When screening information matters
A private bank may ask about a World-Check profile, adverse-media report or PEP status. If the source contains errors, the record challenge should be separately documented. A correction request cannot make a bank accept a client's wealth explanation or waive mandatory due diligence.
Privacy in high-value matters
The first contact should not require a full wealth statement, tax return or passport. After client suitability and conflicts review, supporting files should be handled through an appropriately protected channel, with access restricted to those who legitimately need the information.
Frequently asked questions
Can a bank reject a wealthy client without a sanctions designation?
Yes. Risk policies and due-diligence obligations may be broader than sanctions screening.
Is a family-office structure an automatic red flag?
No; the facts, transparency and jurisdictional rules matter.
Is a PEP automatically ineligible for private banking?
No. Firms apply legal due diligence and their own risk policies; PEP status is not in itself a criminal finding.
Can I send my full wealth dossier through the first form?
No. Use the initial form for high-level facts and an approved secure channel for sensitive financial documents.
Can a rejected application be resubmitted?
Sometimes, depending on institution and circumstances, but a consistent evidence-based explanation is preferable to repeated speculative applications.
Related reading
Primary sources and verification
Discuss your situation
Please describe the jurisdiction, the decision-maker, what happened and whether you have received a written screening record or bank notice. Do not upload highly sensitive personal or financial data into an unverified form.