Introduction
A real estate transaction may involve more people and companies than the names shown on the sale agreement.
There may be:
- a buyer and seller,
- one or more brokers,
- a company buyer with shareholders and beneficial owners,
- an authorized signatory,
- a person acting under a power of attorney,
- a third party providing the purchase funds,
- another person receiving funds or a refund.
This creates a practical AML question:
Who should the real estate firm screen?
Screening only the direct client may leave important transaction risks unexplored. But performing identical full onboarding on every name connected to the deal may create unnecessary work and document requests.
The better approach is to identify each party’s role, determine why that party matters, and apply proportionate checks.
Screening Is Not the Same as Full CDD
Screening commonly includes checking a person or company against:
- applicable sanctions and terrorism lists,
- politically exposed person information,
- adverse media or other risk information where appropriate.
Customer Due Diligence is broader. It may also include identity verification, beneficial ownership, purpose of the relationship, source of funds, source of wealth, risk assessment, ongoing monitoring, and approval.
A person may therefore need to be screened because they are relevant to the transaction without necessarily becoming a fully onboarded customer.
The reverse is also important: a clear screening result does not mean that CDD is complete.
Screen Parties According to Their Role
The firm should begin by mapping everyone connected to the transaction.
| Party | Normal AML approach |
|---|---|
| The firm’s direct customer | Complete the required CDD, identity verification, sanctions and PEP screening, risk assessment, and any enhanced review required by the risk. |
| The other principal party | Identify the buyer or seller on the other side and perform appropriate screening. The depth of additional review should reflect the firm’s role and the transaction risk. |
| A company customer | Screen the legal entity and identify, verify, and screen its natural-person beneficial owners. Relevant control persons should also be considered. |
| Authorized representative or signatory | Identify and screen the person, and verify their authority to act for the customer or company. |
| Power-of-attorney holder | Screen the representative as well as the principal and confirm that the POA covers the intended transaction. |
| Third-party payer | Identify and screen the payer, understand their relationship with the buyer, and assess the source and route of the funds where required. |
| Person receiving funds or a refund | Confirm why that person or account is receiving the money and screen them where they differ from the contractual party. |
| Co-broker or reliance party | Verify the business counterparty and any reliance arrangement. The involvement of another broker does not automatically replace the firm’s own AML responsibilities. |
The same person may occupy more than one role. For example, a shareholder may also be the company’s UBO, authorized signatory, and source of the purchase funds.
The file should make those roles clear.
1. The Direct Customer
The direct customer is the starting point.
If the firm represents the seller, the seller is normally its direct client. If the firm represents the buyer, the buyer is normally its direct client.
The firm should complete the applicable CDD and screening measures on its customer before proceeding. This may include:
- identity verification,
- sanctions screening,
- PEP screening,
- beneficial ownership checks for a legal person,
- customer risk assessment,
- source of funds or source of wealth evidence where required.
The firm should not weaken CDD on its own customer because another broker or developer is involved.
2. The Buyer and Seller
Both the buyer and seller are principal parties to the transfer of the property.
A brokerage may represent only one side, but the other party can still introduce sanctions, PEP, geographic, ownership, payment, or reputational risk into the transaction.
This does not necessarily mean identical full onboarding of both parties in every case.
The firm should determine:
- whether the party is its direct customer,
- what information it already holds,
- what role another broker performs,
- whether any reliance arrangement exists,
- whether the transaction presents higher-risk indicators,
- whether additional evidence is needed.
At minimum, the firm should know who is buying, who is selling, and whether either party presents an identifiable concern.
3. Companies and Their UBOs
Screening only the company name is not sufficient.
Where the buyer or seller is a company, the firm should understand:
- the legal entity,
- its ownership and control structure,
- its natural-person beneficial owners,
- the people authorized to act for it.
If one company owns another company, the review may need to continue through the ownership layers until the relevant natural persons are identified.
Not every name appearing in a company document necessarily requires identical treatment. The focus should be on beneficial owners, persons exercising control, authorized representatives, and anyone whose role or risk makes them relevant.
4. Representatives and Power-of-Attorney Holders
A representative is not merely a messenger. They may sign documents, provide instructions, communicate with brokers, or control important parts of the transaction.
The firm should:
- identify and screen the representative,
- identify and screen the principal,
- verify the representative’s authority,
- understand why the principal is not acting directly,
- confirm that the authority covers the intended action.
Screening the representative does not replace screening the person or company they represent.
5. Third-Party Payers
The person buying the property is not always the person providing the money.
A parent may pay for a child. A shareholder may fund a company purchase. A related company may make the transfer. These arrangements may be legitimate, but the payer should not remain an unexplained name on a payment receipt.
The firm should consider:
- who the payer is,
- how they are connected to the buyer,
- why they are funding the purchase,
- whether they have been screened,
- whether their source of funds is relevant,
- whether the arrangement changes the transaction risk.
If the payer is a company, its ownership and control may also need to be understood.
6. Other Brokers, Developers, and Intermediaries
A broker, developer, introducer, or other intermediary may hold customer documents or play an important role in the transaction.
Their involvement should not lead the firm to assume:
“Someone else must have screened everyone.”
Where another party’s CDD is being relied upon, the arrangement should satisfy the applicable reliance requirements. Relevant information should be available immediately, supporting documents should be obtainable without delay, and the firm should still be able to defend its own decision.
Business counterparties may also require appropriate verification and risk review, particularly where they:
- introduce the customer,
- provide CDD information,
- receive commission or other payments,
- issue transaction instructions,
- operate from another jurisdiction,
- create an unusual or unclear role in the transaction.
This does not mean screening every employee working for the other firm.
Not Everyone Requires Identical Checks
A common mistake is to treat screening as all or nothing.
The firm should not automatically perform full customer onboarding on every:
- employee,
- junior company shareholder,
- broker’s administrative staff member,
- family member with no transaction role,
- person mentioned incidentally in supporting documents.
However, a person becomes relevant where they:
- own or control a customer,
- act for a party,
- provide or receive funds,
- give transaction instructions,
- benefit from the arrangement,
- create a sanctions, PEP, ownership, or other material risk.
The decision should be based on role and risk, not merely on how many names appear in the file.
What Happens When Screening Produces a Match?
Different screening results require different responses.
Potential Sanctions Match
A name similarity should be investigated using available identifiers. A confirmed match may require immediate legal action, including applicable freezing, prohibition, and reporting measures.
PEP Match
PEP status is not a sanctions designation and does not automatically prohibit the transaction. It normally requires closer risk assessment, appropriate enhanced measures, approval, and ongoing monitoring.
Adverse Media
Adverse information should be assessed for credibility, relevance, seriousness, and connection to the person being screened. An unverified online allegation should not automatically be treated as a confirmed fact.
The firm should record how each potential match was reviewed and resolved.
When Should Screening Take Place Again?
Screening should not be treated as a one-time exercise.
Further screening may be needed when:
- a new transaction begins,
- the customer’s ownership or control changes,
- a new payer or representative appears,
- previously supplied information changes,
- the customer’s risk profile increases,
- updated sanctions or PEP information becomes available,
- unusual activity is identified.
The frequency and depth should reflect the applicable legal requirements, internal policy, and risk presented by the relationship.
A Practical Screening Checklist
Before proceeding, compliance should be able to confirm:
- Who is the firm’s direct customer?
- Who are the buyer and seller?
- Is either party a company?
- Have the relevant UBOs and control persons been identified?
- Is anyone acting under a POA or other authority?
- Is the payer different from the buyer?
- Will any third party receive funds or a refund?
- Is another broker or firm providing CDD information?
- Have the relevant parties been screened?
- Were potential matches properly reviewed?
- Is the screening evidence retained?
- Is the decision to proceed or escalate documented?
A role map prepared early in the transaction can prevent important parties from being overlooked.
The Regulatory Position
UAE AML requirements call for the identification and verification of customers, beneficial owners, and persons acting on behalf of customers. Ministry of Economy and Tourism guidance also expects regulated DNFBPs to screen customers and beneficial owners and to apply ongoing, risk-based controls.
Targeted financial sanctions obligations also require firms to avoid making funds or other assets available, directly or indirectly, to designated persons or entities.
In practical terms, the firm should not limit its attention to the name written at the top of the KYC form. It should understand who owns, controls, represents, funds, and benefits from the transaction.
Where InfoAML Helps
InfoAML helps real estate firms build a clearer transaction-party record by supporting teams in:
- recording individual and company customers,
- linking shareholders, UBOs, representatives, and other related parties,
- screening companies and natural persons,
- storing screening results and supporting evidence,
- documenting potential-match decisions,
- recording approvals and escalations,
- preserving an audit trail for inspection.
The objective is not to screen more names without purpose. It is to ensure that every relevant party is identified, assessed, and documented.
Conclusion
A real estate transaction should not be viewed as a single customer name and one screening result.
The firm should understand all material parties and decide what level of screening or CDD applies to each one.
The strongest position is not:
“We screened our client.”
It is:
“We identified the relevant parties, understood their roles, applied proportionate checks, reviewed the results, and documented the decision.”
You May Also Find These Blogs Useful
- The Buyer Is Not Our Client: Do We Still Have AML Duties?
- The Buyer Is Not the Payer: AML Risks in Third-Party Real Estate Payments
- The Buyer Comes Through Another Broker: Who Handles AML?
- The Buyer Signs Through a Power of Attorney: Who Do You Screen?
- A Trade License Is Not Enough: How to Identify the UBOs Behind a Company Buyer
- Why Is the Same Client Asked for KYC More Than Once?