Not upheld: Account administration errors complaint against Furness Building Society

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained that Furness Building Society's identification procedures caused him to lose out on opening a triple access saver account. When Mr M visited the branch on 19 September 2023 with a driving licence that did not match Furness' system address, staff did not check the address or suggest alternative identification despite Mr M having his passport and utility bills available. Furness left a voicemail on 20 September asking Mr M to call back, but Mr M did not respond until 27 September, when he stated he would withdraw his money and take it elsewhere. By the time Mr M returned to the branch on 17 October 2023, the triple access saver product had been withdrawn as a limited offer. The ombudsman found that while Furness should have checked the identification on the day, their prompt voicemail contact mitigated the error, and Mr M's own statements indicated he no longer wished to proceed, making the £25 compensation offer fair and proportionate.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Furness should have checked the identification details when Mr M visited the branch on 19 September 2023, they mitigated their error by contacting Mr M the following day via voicemail. The ombudsman considered it reasonable for Furness to use Mr M's preferred contact method and not to disclose the reason for the call on a voicemail for security purposes. The ombudsman noted that Mr M's own statement during the 27 September call indicated he no longer wished to proceed with opening the account, and that the product was subsequently withdrawn as a limited offer. The ombudsman determined that £25 compensation was proportionate for the branch staff's failure to check the identification on the day, balanced against Furness' prompt attempt to contact Mr M to rectify the error.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website