> This person as far as we are aware is NOT a designated person that sanctions are impacting and they are NOT located in Russia. Irrelevant. If you read up on

> This person as far as we are aware is NOT a designated person that sanctions are impacting and they are NOT located in Russia. Irrelevant. If you read up on the Russia sanctions[1] you'll learn that violating sanctions is a criminal offense, and they are set up so that the responsibility to ensure not only that "your Russian agents, partners or suppliers are subject to current financial sanctions" but also "if individuals or organisations are ‘owned’ or ‘controlled’ either directly or indirectly by designated persons". This means that in order to ensure that a company will not be committing a crime by doing a payment, they need to do an extensive background check on the payment recipient, and even then they would be taking a major risk. In the very least, this would require extensive cooperation from the payment recipient to go through the necessary lengths to demonstrate satisfactorily that paying them wouldn't violate sanctions. However, in this case the person in question seems to already have a propensity to be deceitful and disingenuous in the way they chose to present the problem. [1] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/trading-under-sanctions-with-russia https://www.gov.uk/guidance/trading-under-sanctions-with-rus...