A pair of messages posted on Standard Chartered's Twitter feed on Wednesday afternoon succinctly summed up the British bank's response to allegations it conspired to conceal billions of dollars in transactions with the Iranian government that shifted through a U.S. subsidiary.

“We reject the position + portrayal of facts from the NY State Department of Financial Services,” read the first. It was followed by: “We made mistakes—worth $14m, not $250bn as alleged—and we're sorry. They were made in good faith; we didn't intend to break the rules.”

On Monday, the New York State Dept. of Financial Services (DFS) went public with accusations that the British bank conspired to conceal at least $250 billion in transactions with the Iranian government that were moved through its U.S. subsidiary. It said its investigation of more than 30,000 pages of documents, including internal e-mails, revealed roughly 60,000 secret transactions with Iran that violated U.S. sanctions.

The state regulator has summoned representatives to appear at an Aug. 15 hearing, the outcome of which could be the revocation of SCB's license to operate in New York. The order demands that SCB “immediately submit to and pay for” an on-premises monitor, selected by DFS, to ensure that its New York operations fully comply with all Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering requirements.

Beyond its “tweets,” Standard Chartered  issued a lengthy statement on Aug. 8, in which it “strongly rejects the position or the portrayal of facts as set out in the order issued by the DFS.”

“[Standard Chartered] had previously reported that it is conducting a review of its historical compliance and is discussing that review with U.S. agencies, including the DFS, the Department of Justice, the Office of Foreign Assets Control, the Federal Reserve Group of New York and the District Attorney of New York,” the bank said, adding that the disclosure appears in 2010 and 2011 annual reports and, most recently, in a 2012 interim report.

In January 2010, Standard Chartered says it “voluntarily approached all relevant U.S. agencies,” including the DFS, and informed them that it had initiated a review of compliance with U.S. sanctions, primarily on transactions relating to Iran from 2001-2007.

This review was conducted by external counsel and external consultants and Standard Chartered says it “waived its attorney-client and work product privileges to ensure that all the U.S. agencies would receive all relevant information.” The materials included several thousands of pages of documents and interview notes, plus analysis of approximately 150 million payment messages.

Standard Chartered said that, based on these reviews, it does not think the order issued by the DFS “presents a full and accurate picture of the facts.” 

“The analysis, that [was] shared with all the U.S. agencies demonstrates that throughout the period [Standard Chartered] acted to comply, and overwhelmingly did comply, with U.S. sanctions and the regulations relating to U-turn payments.  As we have disclosed to the authorities, well over 99.9% of the transactions relating to Iran complied with the U-turn regulations.  The total value of transactions which did not follow the U-turn was under $14 million.”

So-called “U-turn” regulations allow certain international fund transfers to pass through U.S. based institutions, but only after they are reviewed by federal authorities for suspicious or illegal activity.

Standard Chartered said its review “did not identify a single payment on behalf of any party that was designated at the time by the U.S. Government as a terrorist entity or organization.” The bank added that it ceased all new business with Iranian customers in any currency over five years ago. 

Standard Chartered's response suggests that the state regulator may have stepped on the toes of federal agencies. Resolution of such matters normally proceeds through a coordinated approach by relevant U.S. agencies, it said, adding it was “surprised to receive the order from the DFS, given that discussions with the agencies were ongoing. “