4 ms·
> In that scenario, Apple should have been more specific in their communications. Often AML policy prohibits this because it could be constituted as tipping of
by sealeck 3y ago
> In that scenario, Apple should have been more specific in their communications.
Often AML policy prohibits this because it could be constituted as tipping off the offender.
- LocalH 3y agoThis is garbage. Imagine if other law worked this way. "We're going to arrest you and put you in jail, but we won't tell you what you're accused of, nor give you a proper appeal." During an investigation, I get it. After charges have been leveled? Most certainly not.
- lolinder 3y agoCharges haven't been leveled yet. In theory, if Apple suspects money laundering they should both freeze the account and tell the authorities. The authorities want time to piece together their case before the money launderers disappear, so they ask for Apple to keep quiet until they have a chance to review everything.
- prosody 3y agoIn addition to what the sibling comment said, the developer does in fact have a recourse to the legal system, which they wrote that they are preparing to make use of. Attempts to analogize the TOS dispute mechanisms of companies to the legal system frequently fail to note that, at least where money is involved, they exist within the legal system, not in a bubble.
- stouset 3y agoAs someone with a long time in fintech, if your account is closed without explanation and nobody will talk to you, this is with almost 100% certainty the answer. It sucks because people who have been clearly committing fraud then plaster you with negative reviews and sob stories but casually fail to mention it was their own egregiously fraudulent activity that caused their account to be shut down. And it also sucks because people who may not have actually done anything wrong get caught up by these controls sometimes and have effectively zero recourse.
- Aeolun 3y agoI do not think this should be a thing.