Question 1
Ms Naidu is tempted to tell Mr Lau the agency may have to report him; Mr Quek warns her against it.
- (i) Ms Naidu reports her suspicion to the agency first, and the agency files the suspicious transaction report through its official channel.
- (ii) If Mr Lau abandons the purchase before completion, the duty to report any suspicion falls away.
- (iii) Telling Mr Lau the agency may have to report him would amount to tipping off, a criminal offence.
- (iv) Suspicion alone is enough to trigger the reporting duty, even without proof of wrongdoing.
Show the answer and full explanation
Answer: A
The rule. The salesperson reports her suspicion to the agency, which files the suspicious transaction report through its official channel. The duty is triggered by suspicion alone and is absolute — it survives even if the deal collapses. Warning the client is tipping off, a criminal offence.
Why A is correct. (i) reporting through the agency, (iii) tipping off as a criminal offence, and (iv) suspicion alone triggering the duty are correct. (ii) is false — the duty does not fall away if Mr Lau abandons the purchase.
The other options.
- B adds the false (ii), the duty lapsing on abandonment.
- C drops the reporting-channel point at (i).
- D drops the tipping-off point at (iii).
Exam note. Suspicion alone triggers an absolute duty; abandoning the deal does not end it, and warning the client is a crime.