Not upheld: service failure and complaint handling complaint against J.P. Morgan Europe Limited trading as Chase

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained that Chase blocked his ATM withdrawal of approximately £240 while abroad on 2 July 2025 and provided poor service when he raised concerns. Chase initially offered £25 compensation and closed his complaint without notification, later reopening it and offering an additional £250 after he followed up. Mr M escalated to the FOS claiming over 100 service failures and requesting over £8,000 in compensation. The ombudsman found that Chase was not responsible for the ATM failure itself, as no withdrawal attempt reached Chase's systems, but acknowledged Chase's failures in complaint handling including missed callbacks and poor in-app chat service. The ombudsman upheld Chase's position that the total £275 compensation paid was fair and reasonable, declining to uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman distinguished between two separate issues: (1) the ATM withdrawal failure itself, and (2) Chase's complaint handling. For the ATM failure, the ombudsman found no evidence that the problem originated with Chase, as no withdrawal attempt reached Chase's systems. Therefore, Chase could not be held liable for the impacts of the ATM failure. For the complaint handling failures, the ombudsman acknowledged Chase's admitted failings but determined that the £275 compensation already paid was fair and reasonable in relation to the impact of these specific service failures, applying the FOS's standard approach to compensation.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website