Brighter Consultancy Blog

Sanctions Compliance in Shipping: Why Marine Insurers and P&I Clubs Need the Right Lists and the Right Tools

Written by Darren Temple | Oct 3, 2025 2:46:50 PM

In the world of maritime sanctions, marine insurers and P&I clubs play a vital role in protecting the sector from regulatory and operational risk. But as expectations from regulators increase and sanctions regimes grow more intricate, relying on standard compliance approaches is no longer enough.

Two areas are particularly critical for effective sanctions risk management:

  1. Bridging the gap between the OFSI Consolidated List and the FCDO Sanctions List
  2. Moving from vessel name screening to IMO-number-based checks 

Used together, these enhancements can significantly strengthen compliance defences and reduce risk exposure for the maritime community.

1. The OFSI-FCDO Gap: A Hidden Risk for Maritime Stakeholders

Most UK-based shipping and insurance firms are familiar with the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) Consolidated List, which includes individuals and entities subject to asset freezes. However, fewer firms are actively screening against the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) Sanctions List, which captures a broader set of designations.

This includes:

  • Travel bans
  • Transport and trade restrictions
  • Vessels involved in “dark fleet” activity
  • Other foreign policy measures that do not appear on the OFSI list

This omission creates a compliance blind spot. A vessel may be sanctioned under the FCDO’s wider measures and still go undetected if a firm screens solely against OFSI.

As highlighted by Brighter Consultancy’s recent analysis, best practice means screening against both lists. For P&I clubs and marine insurers, adopting this dual-source approach significantly reduces the risk of unintentionally engaging with sanctioned parties - whether through underwriting, chartering, or claims handling.

2. Why IMO Numbers Transform Sanctions Screening

Even with the right lists in place, screening is only as effective as the data behind it.

Traditionally, most compliance tools rely on vessel name-based screening. But ship names and ownership structures change frequently, and fuzzy name-matching techniques often produce large numbers of false positives. This clogs up resources and creates unnecessary investigative burden.

Enter the IMO number.

Assigned by the International Maritime Organization, this unique vessel identifier remains with a ship for its entire life, regardless of changes in:

  • Name
  • Flag
  • Ownership
  • Operational activity

Using IMO numbers for sanctions screening offers:

  • Increased precision - eliminating false positives
  • Operational efficiency - allowing teams to focus on real threats
  • Regulatory confidence - showing evidence of a risk-based, auditable approach

As platforms like Global RADAR demonstrate, IMO-based screening is becoming the new standard for leading underwriters and global insurers seeking to reduce exposure and modernise their compliance infrastructure.

Why This Matters

Sanctions breaches carry not only financial penalties but also reputational damage that can ripple through the maritime insurance ecosystem. Marine insurers and P&I clubs that equip themselves with both comprehensive sanctions list coverage (OFSI + FCDO) and precision screening via IMO numbers will be best placed to:

  • Protect members from hidden sanctions exposure
  • Enhance operational resilience
  • Demonstrate robust compliance to regulators and stakeholders

Final Thoughts

Sanctions compliance is a strategic imperative. 

By addressing the OFSI-FCDO gap and shifting from name-based to IMO-based screening, you can take a proactive stance in safeguarding yourselves, your members and the wider maritime sector.

Need help reviewing or upgrading your sanctions controls? Contact Brighter Consultancy for independent expertise and practical support.