MENU
An unusual spike in activity has occurred for a customer who is a supplier of aviation parts to a military force. The customer's current line of business is consistent with the banks records, and no adverse media hits have occurred. Which is the best reason for an investigator to continue an investigation?
Suggested Answer: A
Get Premium CAMS-FCI Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
The best reason for an investigator to continue an investigation is that the end-user is a military force. This is because supplying aviation parts to a military force may involve sanctions risk, export control risk, or human rights risk, depending on the nature and destination of the military force. The investigator should conduct further due diligence to determine if the customer is complying with the relevant laws and regulations, and if the bank is exposed to any reputational or legal risk by providing services to the customer.
Former Airline Employee and Aircraft Part Sellers Charged in Kickback ...
Former Airline Employee and Aircraft Part Sellers Charged in Kickback ...
Former airline employee and aircraft part sellers charged in kickback ...
37 comments · newest first
WI
Willetta
10 months ago
Not sure if just being a supplier is enough reason to investigate further.
RO
Rory
10 months ago
Wait, why is that surprising? Military contracts can be sketchy!
LI
Lindsey
11 months ago
No adverse media hits? Seems fine to me.
MA
Marva
11 months ago
The end-user is a military force.
SH
Sharika
11 months ago
I agree, that definitely raises red flags.
LO
Loren
11 months ago
I think option D makes sense since the consistency with bank records usually indicates legitimacy, but the spike in activity still seems odd.
AL
Aleta
11 months ago
I practiced a similar question where the nature of the business was key. I feel like option C could be significant, but I'm not completely confident.
CI
Ciara
12 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think the absence of adverse media hits (option B) could actually suggest there's nothing suspicious going on.
KE
Kerry
1 year ago
I remember discussing how military connections can raise red flags, so option A might be the best reason to investigate further.
RO
Rosina
1 year ago
I feel pretty confident about this one. The military connection seems like the most compelling reason to continue the investigation.
MA
Malcom
1 year ago
I've got a strategy - I'll carefully consider each option and try to identify the one that best aligns with the need to continue the investigation despite the lack of adverse media hits.
BR
Brynn
1 year ago
Okay, let's see. The key seems to be identifying the best reason to continue the investigation, even though the customer's current business is consistent with the bank's records.
GI
Gianna
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this. The question seems to be testing our understanding of when to continue an investigation.
KE
Keneth
1 year ago
This seems like a tricky one. I'll need to think through the different factors carefully.
AN
Antonio
1 year ago
Haha, I bet the investigator is just looking for an excuse to order a fancy steak dinner on the company dime. Option A all the way!
CH
Cherilyn
1 year ago
I see your point, but I still think option A is the most compelling reason.
MO
Mona
1 year ago
D) The current line of business is consistent with the bank's records.
GA
Gaynell
1 year ago
True, but I still think option A is the best reason to continue the investigation.
LA
Laquita
1 year ago
B) There are no adverse media hits.
DO
Dottie
1 year ago
Haha, that investigator must really love steak dinners!
LE
Leandro
1 year ago
A) The end-user is a military force.
RY
Ryan
1 year ago
Aviation parts to a military force? That's a red flag if I ever saw one. Definitely option A for me.
MI
Mi
2 years ago
Consistent with the bank's records? Hmm, that's a good sign, but I'm still leaning towards option A.
SK
Skye
1 year ago
Option A is a key factor to look into, it could reveal more about the situation.
CI
Ciara
1 year ago
Option A makes sense, it's important to consider the end-user.
LA
Lakeesha
1 year ago
Option A) The end-user is a military force.
KR
Kris
2 years ago
No adverse media hits? That's great, but I'm still not convinced. I'd dig a little deeper with option C.
LU
Ludivina
1 year ago
User 4: True, but focusing on the customer's line of business might reveal more information.
WY
Wynell
1 year ago
User 3: But the fact that there are no adverse media hits is also a good sign, right?
JA
Jani
1 year ago
User 2: Agreed, that does seem like a valid reason to dig deeper.
SO
Socorro
1 year ago
User 1: I think we should continue investigating because the customer is a supplier of aviation parts.
WI
Wilda
2 years ago
I see your points, but I think the current line of business being consistent with the bank's records is the key factor here.
EM
Emerson
2 years ago
I disagree, I believe the fact that the customer is a supplier of aviation parts is the most important reason to investigate further.
EL
Eleni
2 years ago
The military connection is a bit suspicious, don't you think? I'd go with option A.
SH
Shawn
1 year ago
User 2: Yeah, I think we should continue the investigation because the end-user is a military force.
FR
France
2 years ago
User 1: I agree, the military connection is definitely suspicious.
HE
Herminia
2 years ago
I think the best reason to continue the investigation is because the end-user is a military force.