EFTA01360683

I Subject: I IRe: J. Epstein KYC Updates: Additional signer [I] classification: For internal use only understand the broadness of the letter but I don't see how darren could be added as Jeffrey is not authorized on her accounts. It would be impossible to add him to that account without her signature. Is that not sufficient for the kyc purposes? original message From: Janice Franklin Sent: 03/03/2014 02:05 PM EST To: Amanda Kirby Cc: Jacqueline Lightbody Subject: Re: J. Epstein KYC updates: Additional signer [I] Classification: For internal use only That was my guess. The point I wanted to make is given how the letter is written Mr. Indyke should be added to account. why? Because the letter states ". . . to give Mr. Indyke signing authority . . . on all accounts associated with the Southern Financial Relationship. account is associated with the Southern Financial Relationship. I recommend that Mr. Epstein sends you another letter listing the specific accounts he wants to update or he could broadly write he would like Mr. Indyke added to the accounts in his (Mr. Epstein's) name and where he is the ultimate beneficial owner. If the instructions are written in this manner, account would not be an issue. Regards, Janice P. Franklin (Embedded image moved to file: pic07579.gif) Janice Franklin, CAMS, CFSA, CFIRS Vice President I AML compliance officer Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas Compliance 60 wall Street. 10005-2836 New York, NY, USA Tel. Fax Emai (Embedded image moved to file: pic26979.gif) I From: CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R. CRIM. P. 6(e) DB-SDNY-0049189 CONFIDENTIAL SDNY_GM_00195373 EFTA01360683