Not upheld: CIFAS marker application for suspected fraud/evasion of payment complaint against Metro Bank PLC (trading as RateSetter)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr Q complained that Metro Bank unfairly recorded a CIFAS 'Misuse of Facility – Evasion of Payment' marker against him in March 2022 in relation to a loan taken out in October 2021. Mr Q argued that Metro could not prove dishonesty and that the marker should be removed, citing severe personal and financial hardship as the reason for non-repayment. The ombudsman found that Metro had reasonable suspicion of fraud based on Mr Q's suspicious pattern of behaviour: cancelling his direct debit instruction before the first payment was due, making multiple attempts to change his contact details, making only one payment, and then ceasing all repayments. The ombudsman upheld Metro's decision to record the marker, finding the threshold for fraud had been met, and rejected Mr Q's complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the standard for CIFAS markers, which requires clear, relevant and rigorous evidence of fraud such that the firm could confidently report the matter to police (reasonable suspicion standard, not proof). The ombudsman found that the pattern of behaviour—cancellation of direct debit before first payment, multiple attempts to change contact details, one payment followed by complete non-payment—demonstrated reasonable concerns that Mr Q did not intend to repay the loan, meeting the threshold for fraud. The ombudsman rejected Mr Q's explanation of hardship as insufficient to overturn the marker, noting that Mr Q had not raised complaints about lack of repayment support with Metro first.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website