Canonical entries are intentionally scope-bounded. This site is not legal advice and does not assert regulatory compliance.

Canonical Statement

Escalation and suspicion assessment MUST be driven by documented indicators, contextual analysis, and corroborating evidence, with human review for high-impact outcomes.

Definition

Within this framework, case escalation is the governed process of converting indicators into reviewable suspicion assessments through evidence weighting, context analysis, and explicit resolution records.

Why It Matters

Alerts and scores are signals, not outcomes. Without explicit assessment and sign-off controls, escalation quality and consistency degrade quickly.

Failure Mode if Ignored

Automation substitutes for review, thresholds drift without governance, and case outcomes are not auditable or reproducible.

Scope & Non-Claims

This entry is scoped to regulated banking environments in the EU/UK and operational interpretation for escalation and suspicion assessment in crypto compliance.

This entry does not provide legal advice, does not mandate reporting outcomes, and requires human validation for final compliance determinations.

Sources