The bank further argues that the argument that it was sufficient to report its suspicions should be rejected, and according to the bank, the report does not exempt it from the obligations that apply to it in accordance with the law.
The bank further refers to the position of the regulators, which it claims is sufficient to support its claim and asks the court to adopt its recommendations.
With regard to the plaintiffs' claim that the bank seeks in its summaries to expand the front in an improper manner by allegedly claiming for the first time, only in the framework of its summaries, that a "crisis of confidence" has been created with the plaintiffs, according to the bank, this claim is a rejection of the law, since it claims that the claim was expressed in the bank's claims from the beginning of the proceeding.
In light of all of the above, the bank argues that the plaintiffs were unable to prove why the bank's decision to close the accounts was unreasonable, and therefore it reiterated its petition to dismiss the claim, while charging the plaintiffs with expenses and attorney's fees.
- I hereby note that in accordance with my decision of January 22, 2018, the Bank of Israel's position was also submitted to the file on May 7, 2018, which was formulated in joint staff work with the Money Laundering Prohibition Authority (hereinafter and hereinafter: the "Regulators' Position"). In the framework of this position, the obligations imposed on the banks in accordance with the legislation relating to the prevention of money laundering and terrorism are detailed, while dividing them into two categories - one - know the customer and risk assessment, and the second - the actions that the banking corporation is required to perform, in order to reduce the risk to the other and in accordance with his assessment.
In more detail, in their position, the regulators point to a number of indications that can assist in assessing the risk inherent in the customer and his activity, a risk also known as the "inherent risk", including, with regard to the type of customer - whether he is a corporation or an individual, an Israeli resident or a foreign resident, an employee or self-employed, the customer's connection to the branch and whether he is a public figure. As for the degree of risk inherent in the type of activity of the client, it is a function of parameters such as: personal or business account, cash activity, transfers abroad, activity in checks, activity with countries at high risk of money laundering and terrorist financing, economic or business logic in the activity, correspondent banking, whether the client acts for himself or for third parties, and so on.