Not upheld: Cifas fraud marker reporting / account closure complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr I complained that Revolut unfairly recorded adverse information about him on the Cifas national fraud database following account closure in July 2025. Mr I initially told Revolut that a friend had used his account without his knowledge, but later claimed he was the victim of a scam via instant messaging. The ombudsman found Revolut had sufficient grounds to escalate concerns based on the receipt of fraudulent funds and Mr I's materially false initial explanation. The ombudsman determined Mr I's account was unreliable due to multiple inconsistencies, changing explanations, and suspicious conduct including cryptocurrency conversion of the received funds. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Revolut had sufficient grounds to record a fraud marker because: (1) Revolut received a report that fraudulent funds had entered the account; (2) Mr I gave Revolut a materially false explanation initially; (3) Mr I's subsequent accounts were inconsistent and unreliable, changing over time and when inconsistencies were raised; (4) the timing of the chat evidence (two days after the transaction and after claiming deletion) was suspicious; and (5) Mr I's conversion of funds to cryptocurrency suggested deliberate dishonesty rather than innocent victimhood.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website