Purchaser buying with funds connected with high-risk for money laundering country

Cutesyusername

Our cash purchaser is buying our house with a substantial loan from a relative who moved to a 'high risk' country. Although the funds originated in and never left the UK, they are obviously subject to very stringent AML checks. Does anyone have any experience with this and know of the chances of the funds being allowed, or is this just likely to be a lengthy waiting game with a poor chance of success (and us waiting for weeks then having to put the house back on the market).

Grizebeck

Irrelevant to you as the buyer solicitors Will do the required checks 

Cutesyusername

Grizebeck said:

Irrelevant to you as the buyer solicitors Will do the required checks 

It's not irrelevant to us as we are the ones who are being asked to wait, essentially holding the property off the market (quoted potentially 4-6 weeks) whilst these solicitors checks take place. What I can't seem to find out is the chances of a successful outcome given the connections with a 'high risk for AML country, making it worth the wait.

anselld

It would be normal to check source of funds before accepting and removing from market, so if there is uncertainty (which it sounds like there is) then leave the house on the market and see what comes along.
The 4-6 weeks story doesn't really stack up anyway.. there is nothing extra that can be done in 4-6 weeks that cannot already be done in one week.

user1977

anselld said:

It would be normal to check source of funds before accepting and removing from market

It wouldn't be normal for the buyer's solicitor to have done their checks at that stage though.

But I wouldn't have particular cause for concern about the "high risk country" bit of it, that just means the solicitors need to be more cautious. I'd probably be more cautious about the "cash buyer meaning they're getting some money from their pal". "4-6 weeks" sounds more like the time they'll take to scrape the money together rather than for the AML checks.

Cutesyusername

anselld said:

It would be normal to check source of funds before accepting and removing from market, so if there is uncertainty (which it sounds like there is) then leave the house on the market and see what comes along.
The 4-6 weeks story doesn't really stack up anyway.. there is nothing extra that can be done in 4-6 weeks that cannot already be done in one week.

The house has been off the market for many weeks now (our estate agent didn't realise the potential for delay when they did a basic check for source of funds before we took it off the market) and for other reasons that'll be too revealing to disclose here, the purchasers are only now looking for a solicitor to begin the AML checking process (they also didn't realise it might be an issue). Their conveyancing solicitor cannot do the checks for 'compliance' reasons (again, our buyers have only just found this out).

The 4-6 weeks was a tentative estimate given by our solicitor for how long these things 'could' take. I just really wanted to know if anyone has been in this position and had a successful outcome, with a very rough timescale. As mentioned, the funds originated in and have always been in the UK, but the account holder moved to a high-risk country.

We don't want to lose the buyer by putting it back on the market if there's a strong possibility that given a reasonable amount of time (a few weeks, not months) the funds will be useable. 

Cutesyusername

user1977 said:

anselld said:

It would be normal to check source of funds before accepting and removing from market

It wouldn't be normal for the buyer's solicitor to have done their checks at that stage though.

But I wouldn't have particular cause for concern about the "high risk country" bit of it, that just means the solicitors need to be more cautious. I'd probably be more cautious about the "cash buyer meaning they're getting some money from their pal". "4-6 weeks" sounds more like the time they'll take to scrape the money together rather than for the AML checks.

Thank you. The loaner is a very close, wealthy relative. The buyers are providing some of the cash, the loan from the relative will be the majority. It's all in one account in the UK, originated here and has been in the account for many years. The buyers are also selling their own house, but using the loan so that they can buy ours without waiting for a sale or creating more of a chain. I'm guessing that they'll repay the loan from the proceeds of their own sale whenever that happens. 

I think it's the 'high risk country' part of all this and the chance that it'll be refused for that reason which worries me the most, so thanks for your comment that this aspect wouldn't concern you. 

Jonboy_1984

We got our current property as the second highest bidder, from what the estate agents revealed the previously accepted buyer was in a similar situation, and their purchase attempt fell apart after three weeks as they couldn’t raise sufficient evidence so four weeks would seem more than reasonable to me.

If they want it they will be jumping through the hoops to prove it asap (assuming the relative feels the same sense of urgency they do, which is never a given!!!!).

user1977

If it causes a delay, it's most likely to be because the buyer's solicitor can't be bothered dealing with the complexity/risk of it involving a high risk country - in which case it ought to be a fairly immediate "no, you'll need to find somebody else to act for you". There's nothing intrinsic about the checks which mean they must take weeks, it's more likely to be to-ing and fro-ing and delays in solicitors or clients replying which adds to the times involved. But that can happen with funds in "safe" countries too.

Martico

I'd be more concerned that you appear to be selling to Boris Johnson

Schwarzwald

AML checks are an iterative process with wait times between asking for documentation  - collecting and providing - reviewing - asking again … so 3-4 weeks doesnt strike me as odd, 6 weeks sounds long but likely includes some buffer. Also, there is a wide range of high-risk countries, I would be less concerned if it is UAE vs Nigeria for example.