Belgian prosecutors initiates probe into Worldline
The probe was triggered by articles in Le Soir and De Standaard, which claimed the company processed payments for firms involved in illegal activities.
'According to these newspapers, the company allegedly processed payments for companies engaged in illegal activities and for which money laundering regulations were allegedly not respected,' the Brussels Public Prosecutor's Office said in a statement, as reported by Bloomberg.
The investigation has been entrusted to the Federal Judicial Police, the statement added.
The allegations stem from reports by the European Investigative Collaborations network, comprising 21 media outlets across Europe.
Worldline, in a statement to Reuters, said it has taken note on the probe and wil cooperate with authorities.
The company also noted that since 2023, it has strengthened merchant risk controls and terminated non-compliant client relationships.
In Sweden, the Financial Supervisory Authority summoned Worldline for a meeting to address the allegations.
'Questions about the information described' and 'how the company works to ensure that their services cannot be exploited for criminal purposes,' were raised, FSA spokesperson Karin Franck said in an emailed statement to Bloomberg.
According to Dagens Nyheter, Worldline allegedly moved high-risk clients from its Belgian unit to its Swedish subsidiary after Visa raised concerns.
Worldline's CEO, Pierre-Antoine Vacheron, described the media reports as an orchestrated campaign and an 'attack' on the company, asserting that Worldline is 'fully committed to strict compliance with regulation and risk prevention standards.'
"Belgian prosecutors initiates probe into Worldline " was originally created and published by Electronic Payments International, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Banks brace for key UK Supreme Court ruling on car finance commissions
LONDON (Reuters) -The UK's Supreme Court will announce a long-awaited ruling on car finance commissions on Friday that could influence whether major banks face a multibillion-pound compensation bill. British lender Close Brothers and South Africa's FirstRand want to overturn a landmark Court of Appeal judgment which said brokers must have fully informed consent from customers in order to receive a commission from lenders. The ruling in three linked cases sent shockwaves through the 40 billion-pound ($53 billion) a year motor finance industry and has weighed heavily on the stocks of the most exposed players, such as Close Brothers and Lloyds. Lloyds has set aside 1.15 billion pounds for potential payouts, while Banco Santander's UK arm has set aside 290 million pounds and Barclays 95 million pounds. The Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates the sector, is mulling a redress scheme that analysts have warned could end up costing the banking industry tens of billions of pounds. The FCA has said it will confirm whether it will implement a redress scheme within six weeks of the Supreme Court's ruling. The Court of Appeal said in October 2024 that lenders are liable to consumers when the commission is "secret", and can be liable when disclosure of the commission is insufficient to obtain informed consent. Lawyers for the FCA argued at April's Supreme Court appeal that the Court of Appeal went "too far", boosting lenders' hopes that any hit they face may be pared back. The potential wider impact of the case was highlighted by media reports that British finance minister Rachel Reeves might legislate to prevent lenders from taking a financial hit, which in turn could hurt her attempts to boost economic growth. The Treasury did not respond to a request for comment. The Supreme Court will give its ruling after 1535 GMT on Friday, once financial markets have closed in London. The court said: "No inference should be drawn from the timing of the hand-down (of the judgment) as to the outcome of the appeals." ($1 = 0.7567 pounds) Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
British steelmakers boosted by change to EU tariffs
British steelmakers will be able to sell more to the EU tariff-free from Friday in a boost for the beleaguered sector. The EU has agreed to more than double the UK's tariff-free quota for certain steel products in a move the Government described as a 'direct win' from Sir Keir Starmer's deal with the bloc earlier this year. At May's UK-EU summit, Sir Keir and European Commission President Ursula Von Der Leyen agreed to restore Britain's steel quotas to historic levels after they were slashed in March. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the announcement was 'yet another positive step forward for the UK steel sector' that would give producers 'certainty'. The agreement comes at a difficult time for the industry, which continues to face 25% tariffs on exports to the US. An agreement with President Donald Trump to effectively reduce those tariffs to zero is yet to come into effect, but Britain has been protected from the 50% tariff Mr Trump imposed on steel from the rest of the world last month. UK Steel director general Gareth Stace said Friday's change was 'excellent news' for the sector that had been 'plagued by problems' in exporting steel to the EU. He added: 'The quota will restore historic trade flows and is good news for both UK steelmakers and their EU customers.' The decision means the UK can export 27,000 tonnes of 'category 17' steel – which includes angles and sections of steel – to the EU each quarter without paying tariffs. The figure had been cut to 10,000 tonnes after the EU introduced a cap intended to prevent a single exporter dominating the market. In total, the UK exports around 2.4 million tonnes of steel to the EU, worth nearly £3 billion and accounting for 75% of British steel exports. Ministers expect the change to help protect jobs in the industry, which has been a priority for the Labour Government since coming to power. In April, the Government used an almost unprecedented weekend recall of Parliament to take control of British Steel to prevent the shutdown of its blast furnaces and maintain the UK's primary steel-making capacity. British Steel's interim chief operating officer Lisa Coulson said: 'The removal of EU tariffs on British-made steel is a significant boost to our business. 'The EU is an important market to us, particularly for the products our highly skilled colleagues manufacture in Scunthorpe, Teesside, and Skinningrove.' But Conservative shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith described the quota as 'tiny' and 'embarrassing from a Government which has nothing to show on removing the US tariffs on steel which the PM claimed to have delivered back in May'. He added: 'It's a paltry return for giving up 12 years of fishing rights and tying the energy costs of every business to a higher cost EU emissions regime over which the UK will have no say. 'When Labour nationalised British Steel we said they had no plan. This government by press release shows we were right.'
Forbes
23 minutes ago
- Forbes
Fake Recruiters Are Getting Smarter (Sort Of). Here's How To Spot Them
I recently received a email that, for a short while, made me think that a top consulting firm might be genuinely interested in my professional services. 'I came across your profile and noticed that you're currently open to new career opportunities. Based on your background and professional interests, I wanted to personally reach out and let you know that we're hiring for several new roles that may align well with your experience,' the email read. It went on to request some information, but nothing that would raise any red flags on first glance, things like: 'what job role(s) you're targeting' and 'your preferred industry and career level.' There were no requests for personal information, suspicious links, or email attachments. My initial glance at this email, which included seeing the consulting firm's name in the sender's email address, didn't raise any red flags, but upon a closer look later, it was clear what was going on. While fake job seekers have been getting more attention recently, recruitment scams, such as fake job postings and messages from impersonated recruiters impersonations, are plaguing more job seekers than ever. According to the FTC, reported business and job opportunity jumped by nearly 18 percent last year, and in the UK, job fraud reports to Action Fraud, the government's consumer protection agency, are up 133% since 2022. It's a major challenge for job seekers — 45% said as much in a recent FlexJobs survey — and one that is more difficult to navigate as AI evolves. But simple steps can protect your personal information, bank account, and dignity. Here's are some ways to spot and stop a fake recruitment email. Slow down and examine the email carefully Scammers often mimic the language and branding of legitimate companies to gain your trust — but subtle signs can reveal their true intentions. Start by checking the sender's email address: is it a personal Gmail or Yahoo account rather than a company domain? When I first saw the email, I was using my phone, and only saw part of the email address, which included the name of the well-know consulting firm. But, sure enough, after closer inspection, it ended in Poor grammar, spelling errors, and generic or sloppy design are common in fraudulent communications like these. This was not the case in my email, but the use of linebreaks was inconsistent, and there was no email signature. So you should also look closely at the formatting of the email, even if otherwise it reads fairly well. Of course, we've all been told to not click on supsoicious links or email attachments, so when those are absent, as they were here, it can elicit a false sense of security. I was being asked to provide information about the type of job I was interested in, not my bank details, so what's the harm in replying with that? The scam part comes later in these situations. You may be asked to apply for the role on a clone website that looks quite similar to the company that's supposedly recruiting you. Then, an interview, often over an internet chat or phone call, may be followed by a job offer. Requests for your banking information or other personal details will likely happen at some point during this process. Play detective on LinkedIn While I already knew this email was a dud, I searched for the sender's name on LinkedIn, and found a profile of a recruiter that actually looked pretty legit. It turns out, that it was. Scammers often use stock images or AI-generated photos and fill their profiles with vague job titles, limited work history, and almost no activity. A legitimate recruiter will typically have a detailed, verifiable work background and visible engagement on the platform, which this first profile I found had. From here, I'm thinking we may have a case of recruiter impersonation. So I did another search of the name and added the name of the company that it claimed to represent in the email, and then I found what I was looking for. This second profile had the same name and photo of the real recruiter, but had only one post and a handful of connections. I also clicked 'More' on the profile, then 'About This Profile' to see when it was created. Brand-new profiles are a common red flag, and this one was brand spanking new. So, I solved the case, and if you find yourself doing the same, make sure you do LinkedIn, and real recruiters everywhere, a favor and report the fraudulent profile. LinkedIn prevented over 70.1 million fake accounts from being created during the registration process in the first half of 2024 alone, but some still fall through the cracks.
