Not upheld: CIFAS marker application - alleged wrongful fraud marker registration complaint against MONZO BANK LIMITED

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S complained that Monzo wrongly applied a CIFAS fraud marker against his name. His account had received multiple fraudulent credits between April and June 2025, and when Monzo asked for proof of entitlement, Mr S's explanations about crypto exchanges were vague and inconsistent, leading to the marker being applied in late June 2025. In September 2025, Mr S disclosed medical conditions and provided further evidence suggesting he was a scam victim, prompting Monzo to review and remove the marker. The ombudsman found that Monzo's initial decision to apply the marker met the CIFAS burden of proof based on available evidence at that time, and that the subsequent removal was a fair resolution, therefore not upholding the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the CIFAS standard requiring reasonable grounds to believe fraud occurred, with clear, relevant and rigorous evidence such that the firm could confidently report to police. The ombudsman found that Monzo's questions were reasonable, and given the number of fraud reports received and the lack of clarity in Mr S's responses, Monzo had met the requisite burden of proof at the time of applying the marker. The subsequent removal of the marker following Mr S's additional disclosure and evidence was fair and constituted appropriate engagement with the issues raised.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website