Who We Support
Firms that have to show their work.
Our clients share one characteristic: someone external is going to examine their controls, and the firm would rather know what that person will find before they find it.
The kinds of firms we work with.
We work with business and institutional clients rather than consumers. Sector matters less than whether the firm carries evidence obligations it needs to satisfy.
Regulated firms
Businesses operating under AML/CFT obligations that need an independent view of whether their policies, client files and screening records would hold up under external review.
- Financial services and payments firms
- Trust and company service providers
- Property and high-value dealers
Professional practices
Law firms, accountancy practices and consultancies carrying client due diligence obligations alongside their own professional and supervisory requirements.
- Legal practices with CDD duties
- Accountancy and audit practices
- Corporate service providers
Corporate groups
Groups that have grown through acquisition or expansion and now hold inconsistent governance records across entities, jurisdictions or business lines.
- Multi-entity holding structures
- Groups integrating acquired businesses
- Firms consolidating group policy libraries
Funds and investment vehicles
Vehicles and their administrators that need investor onboarding evidence, beneficial ownership records and governance documentation organised to institutional standards.
- Fund managers and administrators
- Investment holding vehicles
- Family offices
When firms tend to call us.
Engagements usually begin at one of these moments. If more than one applies, the sequencing of the work matters as much as its scope.
A bank or insurer has asked questions
A counterparty, correspondent bank, payment provider or insurer has requested evidence of your controls and the existing documentation does not answer the question cleanly.
Onboarding has stalled
A relationship is being held up because beneficial ownership, source of funds or governance evidence cannot be produced in a form the other side accepts.
A supervisory visit is expected
A review, inspection or information request is anticipated and the firm wants its evidence organised and its gaps known before someone else finds them.
Findings are already on the table
An internal review, external audit or supervisory exercise has raised issues, and the firm needs a structured remediation and closure trail rather than a list of intentions.
Control ownership is unclear
Policies exist but nobody can say who owns a given control, when it was last reviewed, or where the evidence that it operates is kept.
Growth has outpaced the controls
Headcount, jurisdictions or product lines have expanded and the compliance operating layer has not been rebuilt to match.
When this works well.
An independent review only produces value if the firm is prepared to engage with what it finds. These are the conditions that make an engagement worth running.
- You can name an internal owner who will respond to document requests.
- You are prepared to receive findings that are uncomfortable but evidenced.
- You want a written record of what was reviewed and on what basis.
- You accept that scope, conflicts and independence are agreed before work starts.
We decline engagements where scope cannot be defined, where a conflict cannot be managed, or where the intended output would misrepresent the nature of the work.
How engagements are scoped and runNot sure whether your situation fits?
Describe the pressure you are responding to and we will tell you honestly whether this is work we should take on.