And this is not about being less strict, it’s simply that databases are not universal. Even very "strict" scoring with one provider cannot guarantee the same result across another system. That’s why we’re in discussions with liquidity partners to gain access to their AML APIs, so our checks can align more closely with theirs and further reduce this risk.
So our AML process already minimizes risk as much as possible, but it cannot be eliminated 100% because different providers rely on different datasets.
If the transaction is already on hold with you while it is being checked, why can't you ask the LP to also check the AML score before you take any action, regardless of the refund or continuation of the swap?
You know that some of the most useful liquidity providers often do not release funds even after the client passes the KYC procedure?