Upheld: Account closure without notice complaint against FREEMANS PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6003511 of 2025-12-18T00:00:00+00:00. Account closure without notice complaint against FREEMANS PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6003511 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2025-12-18T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | FREEMANS PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY |
| Product | Credit card |
| Claim type | Account closure without notice |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Freemans Public Limited Company must remove the CIFAS marker and pay Ms H £1,500 in compensation for distress, upset, worry, loss of reputation, and serious disruption to daily life over a sustained period. |
Summary
Ms H opened catalogue shopping accounts with Freemans and ordered items in December 2024. By April 2025, she was in arrears and contacted a debt advisor, then called Freemans to arrange a payment plan. A Freemans advisor incorrectly told her the debt had been sold. In June 2025, Ms H discovered that Freemans had reported a CIFAS fraud marker, which triggered a disciplinary process at her employer and resulted in her dismissal. The ombudsman found that Freemans lacked sufficient evidence to report the marker, as Ms H's conduct—returning items, seeking payment arrangements, and managing her finances—was inconsistent with fraudulent intent. The complaint was upheld, the marker ordered to be removed, and £1,500 compensation awarded for distress and disruption.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that Freemans failed to meet the high bar required by CIFAS standards to report a fraud marker. The evidence did not demonstrate that Ms H had witting involvement in a deliberate and intentionally dishonest act. Ms H's actions—returning items, contacting Freemans to arrange payment, and seeking debt advice—were inconsistent with fraudulent intent. The ombudsman noted that financial difficulties and poor debt management do not constitute fraud or financial crime. Freemans had a missed opportunity to assist Ms H when she called on 7 May 2025, and the advisor's incorrect information about the debt being sold prevented proper engagement. The ombudsman concluded that falling into financial difficulties does not meet the required burden of proof for reporting a CIFAS marker.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| FREEMANS PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY, all decisions | 9 | 11% |
| Account closure without notice, all decisions | 11,650 | 19% |
| Credit card, all decisions | 25,211 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website