Anti-Money-Laundering Compliance Editing and Proofreading Services

Anti-money-laundering work produces documents that are read by three parties with very different purposes: an internal reviewer deciding whether to escalate, a regulator sampling files to judge whether your programme functions, and — occasionally, years later — a prosecutor or defence counsel reconstructing what your institution knew. A file note that made perfect sense to the analyst who wrote it can look, on that third reading, like evidence that a warning was recorded and ignored. Precision here is not a matter of polish; it is the difference between a defensible file and an indefensible one.

We edit what compliance functions and consultancies produce — suspicious activity and suspicious transaction report narratives, customer due diligence and enhanced due diligence files, source of funds and source of wealth assessments, politically exposed person reviews, sanctions screening procedures and alert disposition notes, transaction monitoring rule documentation and tuning rationales, AML and counter-terrorist financing policies and procedures, business-wide and customer risk assessments, regulatory examination responses and remediation plans, board and MLRO reporting, training material and case studies for staff, and audit and independent review reports. Our editors check that conclusions follow visibly from the evidence recorded, and that the language is neutral where neutrality is required and specific where vagueness would be read as evasion.

The suspicious activity report narrative is the highest-leverage document in the entire discipline, because it is the only part of your work that leaves the institution and is read by people with no access to your systems. A narrative that opens with an account number and a rule reference tells a financial intelligence unit nothing. We write these so the first sentence states who did what, with how much, when, and why it is suspicious in plain terms — then supplies the account and relationship background, then the specific transactions in a chronology that a reader can follow, then what the institution has done and whether the relationship continues. We remove hedging that is meant to sound cautious but reads as uncertainty about your own file, and we cut the conclusory phrase that damages more reports than any other: describing activity as "unusual" without ever saying what would have been usual for this customer.

Everything you send is treated in strict confidence, and we are accustomed to material that is legally restricted, including tipping-off constraints — please redact identifying details where your obligations require it. We are editors, not compliance advisers or lawyers, and we offer no view on whether a report should be filed. What we can do is make your documents clear, chronological and defensible, and we work regularly with analysts writing in English as an additional language.