Not upheld: Cifas marker recording for misuse of facility complaint against Monzo Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr I complained that Monzo Bank Limited unfairly recorded a Cifas 'misuse of facility' marker against his name. Mr I claimed he received £530 as a loan to help his friend pay for medical treatment for a sick child, which he then transferred to his wife for currency conversion and onward transmission to the friend. However, the ombudsman found Mr I's account unreliable due to inconsistencies (changing whether the sick child was a son or daughter), suspicious transaction patterns (payment reference 'Power Tools' not matching the stated purpose, funds transferred to wife with reference 'gift'), and lack of credible supporting evidence (WhatsApp screenshots with no previous history, claims of disappearing messages). The ombudsman concluded Monzo acted reasonably in recording the marker based on the sending bank's report that funds were sent under false pretences and upheld Monzo's decision not to remove it.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found Mr I's testimony inconsistent and unsupported by evidence. Key concerns included: the discrepancy between Mr I stating the funds were for his friend's daughter versus his son; the unusual 'Power Tools' payment reference that did not match the stated purpose; Mr I's failure to question the funds despite the mismatched reference; the suspicious WhatsApp screenshots with no previous chat history and claims of disappearing messages; the prompt transfer of funds to his wife and then out with reference 'gift' rather than to a third party; and two different versions of how he discovered the Cifas marker. The ombudsman concluded that Monzo had reasonable grounds to believe financial crime had been committed and that the evidence was clear, relevant and rigorous enough to justify the marker.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website