Not upheld: Account closure without notice complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S disputed approximately £12,500 in transactions made at establishment D while on holiday, claiming he did not authorize them and suggesting his card was lost or stolen and his PIN compromised through shoulder surfing. Barclaycard concluded the transactions were authorized, sent a verification text to which Mr S confirmed the transactions were genuine, and subsequently closed his account. The ombudsman found the transactions were properly authenticated and, on the balance of probabilities, likely authorized because Mr S probably shared his card and PIN with someone, as there was no plausible alternative explanation for PIN compromise. The ombudsman upheld Barclaycard's decision to close the account and declined to order amendment of Mr S's credit file.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman concluded that while the transactions were properly authenticated, the key issue was whether they were authorized. The ombudsman found that for a third party to use Mr S's card and PIN, they would have needed both the physical card and the PIN. Given the implausibility of guessing the PIN and no evidence of it being written down, the ombudsman determined that either shoulder surfing occurred or Mr S shared his PIN with someone. Finding no plausible point of shoulder surfing compromise, the ombudsman concluded on the balance of probabilities that Mr S likely shared his card and PIN with someone, making the transactions authorized. The ombudsman also found Barclaycard acted reasonably in relying on Mr S's confirmation that transactions were genuine and acted within their terms in closing the account.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website