Partially upheld: provision of incorrect information about foreign currency exchange rate and retail margin; failure to disclose retail margin complaint against HSBC UK Bank Plc
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6076830 of 2026-06-08T00:00:00+00:00. provision of incorrect information about foreign currency exchange rate and retail margin; failure to disclose retail margin complaint against HSBC UK Bank Plc. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6076830 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-08T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | HSBC UK Bank Plc |
| Product | Current account |
| Claim type | provision of incorrect information about foreign currency exchange rate and retail margin; failure to disclose retail margin |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | HSBC Bank UK Plc to pay Mr D £100 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by incorrect exchange rate information and the need to make alternative arrangements. |
Summary
Mr D complained that HSBC provided incorrect information about its foreign currency exchange rate, telling him he would receive the live market rate with no margin when HSBC actually applied a retail margin to the live mid-rate. When Mr D attempted to transfer over 340,000 EUR to Sterling in early September 2025, he discovered the actual rate was less favourable and chose not to proceed. Mr D sought £2,000 compensation for the difference between expected and offered rates, plus consequential losses from delayed investment, and requested disclosure of HSBC's retail margin. The ombudsman found HSBC's information was incorrect and that the retail margin should have been disclosed, but rejected financial loss claims because no transaction occurred and subsequent delays were Mr D's responsibility. The ombudsman awarded £100 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by having to make alternative arrangements.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that HSBC provided incorrect information about its exchange rate methodology and retail margin, which was a clear failing. However, no financial loss occurred because Mr D chose not to complete the transaction when offered the less favourable rate. The ombudsman rejected claims for consequential losses (lost investment returns) because Mr D would have waited for the favourable rate on 2 September regardless of the misinformation, and subsequent delays in investing funds were entirely within Mr D's control, not caused by HSBC. The ombudsman upheld the principle that HSBC should have disclosed the retail margin but awarded no additional compensation beyond £100 for distress and inconvenience, as the non-disclosure had minimal impact after Mr D decided not to proceed.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| HSBC UK Bank Plc, all decisions | 7,532 | 23% |
| Current account, all decisions | 45,590 | 19% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website