Use cases

Tell namesakes from real adverse media hits

Reads each screening hit next to your customer record: do the details fit, what part the person plays, what wrongdoing it shows. Only an analyst concludes.

Ask for an invite

Try it on this example

Example · A fraud conviction about a namesake in another city and trade

What we hold on the customer (no dates of birth): Name: Graham Oakfield Other names held: none Lives in: Harrogate, North Yorkshire Occupation: managing director of Oakfield Road Haulage Ltd, a road freight firm with a depot in Harrogate Relationship: personal current account and business account since 2019

Article text returned by the screening tool

Accountant jailed for stealing from elderly clients A Norwich accountant who stole more than £380,000 from elderly clients over six years has been jailed for five years. Graham Oakfield, 61, of Thorpe St Andrew, ran a small bookkeeping and tax practice from an office above a shop in the city centre. Norwich Crown Court heard that he persuaded eleven clients, most of them in their eighties, to sign forms he said were routine tax paperwork. The forms gave him access to their savings and investment accounts, and he moved the money into accounts he controlled. He pleaded guilty to fraud by abuse of position and forgery at an earlier hearing. The court heard that the thefts came to light when the daughter of one client noticed withdrawals from her mother's savings and contacted the bank. Police found that Oakfield had used the money to pay off gambling debts and to buy a holiday flat. Detective Sergeant Laura Hendry, who led the investigation, said: "These were people who trusted him with their life savings. Several of them have not been able to get their money back, and the stress has affected their health." In mitigation, his barrister said Oakfield had shown remorse and had repaid about £40,000 before his arrest. Sentencing him, the judge said he had "betrayed the trust of vulnerable people who relied on him completely". A hearing to recover his assets will take place next year.
  1. Do the details in the article, beyond the name, fit the customer in the subject profile?Clearly a different person99%
  2. What part does the named person play in the story?Accused or wrongdoer100%
  3. Which wrongdoing does the story describe?Fraud100%
  4. Where does the case against the named person stand, as the article reports it?Convicted or sanctioned99%
  5. What kind of source is the article?News report100%
  6. Does the article give enough about the named person, beyond the name, to judge whether they are the customer?Yes94%
  7. What should the screening team do with this hit?Discard with the reason68%

These are real answers stored from one run on this example.

The prism behind it

Tell namesakes from real adverse media hits7 questions

Fields

  • What we hold on the customer (no dates of birth)
  • Article text returned by the screening tool

Context

These are news articles and other items that our screening tool returned for a customer's name, at onboarding or on a periodic refresh. The name has already matched. The subject profile is what we hold about the customer; the article is the text the tool found. Each hit is read so analysts see first the ones likely to be about our customer and about financial crime, while clear namesakes and irrelevant stories go to a discard queue that is sampled. Our adverse media categories for financial crime: fraud, bribery and corruption, money laundering, tax crime, sanctions evasion, terrorism or terrorist financing, drug trafficking, human trafficking or modern slavery, organised crime, cybercrime, environmental crime, and market abuse or insider dealing. A regulatory breach that is not a crime, and crimes outside this list, are recorded but are not financial crime for this purpose. The name match is done; judge the other details only. Ages and dates of birth are compared by code, so do not work out an age from a year or compare ages. Several people can share a name, and an article can name several people: the named person is the one with the customer's name. Criminal allegations are criminal offence data, which data protection law protects more strictly than other personal data. These answers can discount a hit, with the reason kept on file; only an analyst can conclude that adverse media applies to a customer, and nothing here refuses, closes or exits an account. Never treat a name, a nationality or a place as a sign on its own.

Questions

  1. Do the details in the article, beyond the name, fit the customer in the subject profile? Choice

    Compare the places, the job, the employer or business, and any other details the article gives about the named person with the subject profile. Leave out ages and dates, which code compares. Pick one option.

    • Clearly the same person Several details match the profile, such as the town and the business, and none conflicts.
    • Possibly the same person The article gives little beyond the name, only one detail matches, or some details match and others conflict, such as the same business in a different town.
    • Clearly a different person Details conflict with the profile, such as a different town and a different job or business, and none matches.

  2. What part does the named person play in the story? Choice

    Judge the person with the customer's name, not others in the story. Pick one option.

    • Accused or wrongdoer The wrongdoing is alleged against the named person, at any stage: suspected, investigated, charged, convicted, fined or banned.
    • Victim The named person suffered the wrongdoing, or lost money to it.
    • Professional in the case The named person is a lawyer, judge, investigator, official, auditor or journalist working on the case.
    • Witness or commentator The named person gave evidence, or comments on the story as an expert, a neighbour or a public figure.
    • Passing mention The named person appears in the article but plays no part in the story.

  3. Which wrongdoing does the story describe? Choice

    Pick the main wrongdoing the story describes, whoever it is about. Use the categories in the context.

    • No wrongdoing The story describes no crime, breach or allegation.
    • Fraud Deceiving people or firms for money: theft by an adviser, forged documents, false accounts, investment or benefit fraud.
    • Bribery and corruption Paying or taking bribes, kickbacks, or misuse of public office for gain.
    • Money laundering Hiding or moving the proceeds of crime, including money mule networks.
    • Tax crime Tax evasion, VAT fraud or helping others evade tax.
    • Sanctions evasion Trading with, or moving money for, sanctioned people, firms or countries.
    • Terrorism or terrorist financing Terrorist acts, or raising or moving money for terrorism.
    • Drug trafficking Producing, importing or supplying illegal drugs.
    • Human trafficking or modern slavery Trafficking people, forced labour or sexual exploitation for gain.
    • Organised crime A criminal group acting together over time, where no narrower category above fits better.
    • Cybercrime Hacking, ransomware, online account theft or selling stolen data.
    • Environmental crime Illegal waste dumping, pollution, logging or wildlife trade.
    • Market abuse or insider dealing Insider dealing, market manipulation or misleading investors about a listed firm.
    • Regulatory breach, not criminal A regulator fines, censures or restricts someone for breaking its rules, with no crime alleged.
    • Other crime, not financial A crime outside the financial crime categories, such as assault, a driving offence or burglary.

  4. Where does the case against the named person stand, as the article reports it? Choice

    Pick the latest stage the article reports for the named person. Choose Not accused when the article accuses them of nothing.

    • Allegation only Claims are reported, but no investigation, charge or case is mentioned.
    • Under investigation Police, a prosecutor or a regulator is investigating, or the person was arrested and not charged.
    • Charged or on trial The person has been charged, sued, or is on trial, with no outcome yet.
    • Convicted or sanctioned The person was convicted, pleaded guilty, was found liable, or was fined or banned by a court or regulator.
    • Cleared The person was acquitted, charges were dropped, or a conviction was overturned.
    • Settled The case was settled or closed by agreement without a finding against the person.
    • Not accused The article accuses the named person of nothing.

  5. What kind of source is the article? Choice

    Judge from the text itself. Pick one option.

    • News report A factual report by a news outlet, with reporting on events, courts or officials.
    • Court or regulator record A judgment, a charge sheet, an enforcement notice or an official statement.
    • Press release A statement put out by a company, a party to the case or a campaign group.
    • Opinion or blog A comment piece, a blog post or a review, giving views more than facts.
    • Social media or forum A social media post, a forum thread or a review site comment.

  6. Does the article give enough about the named person, beyond the name, to judge whether they are the customer? Yes / No

    Yes: The article gives at least one detail about the named person, such as a town, a job, an employer or a business, that can be compared with the profile. No: The article gives the name and nothing else that can be compared, or the text is cut off or not an article.

  7. What should the screening team do with this hit? Choice

    Suggest a step for the screening team. Discarding a hit keeps the answers and the reason on file; no step concludes anything about the customer.

    • Discard with the reason The article is clearly about someone else, or names the person only as a victim, a professional, a witness or in passing: discard with the reason on file, for the weekly sample.
    • Record as low relevance Possibly or clearly the customer, but the story is not about financial crime, or the person was cleared: keep on file with no review now.
    • Analyst review Possibly or clearly the customer, accused of financial crime: an analyst reviews the hit.
    • Senior review first Clearly the customer, accused of serious financial crime such as money laundering, terrorist financing, sanctions evasion or large-scale fraud: an analyst reviews it first and the money laundering reporting officer is told.

Lens columns

same_person, same_person_probability, subject_role, subject_role_probability, crime_category, crime_category_probability, case_stage, case_stage_probability, source_type, source_type_probability, enough_information, enough_information_probability, suggested_step, suggested_step_probability

Run it on your own text

Add this prism in the app, change any question, and test it on a file of your own.

Ask for an invite