Not upheld: unfair account closure and fraud marker registration complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr N complained that Revolut unfairly closed his account and registered a Cifas fraud marker against him. Fraudulent funds were received into his account in February 2025 and transferred out the same day. Mr N claimed the funds were a gift from a friend whose account was closed, but provided inconsistent explanations to Revolut and the ombudsman, failed to provide supporting evidence, and allowed the friend access to his phone to respond to Revolut's inquiries. The ombudsman found Mr N's account improbable and concluded he was complicit in the fraud, upholding Revolut's decision to register the marker and refusing to order its removal.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Cifas standard requiring reasonable grounds to believe fraud occurred and clear, relevant, rigorous evidence of deliberate complicity. The ombudsman found major inconsistencies in Mr N's account: his explanation to Revolut differed from his later explanation; he allowed another person access to his phone and banking credentials; he failed to question suspicious payments or inform Revolut of compromised security; he provided no evidence to support his claims about other accounts, cash withdrawals, or blackmail; and the arrangement with S appeared permanent rather than a one-off gift. The ombudsman concluded it was improbable that Mr N did not know the payments were fraudulent and therefore found him complicit in the fraud.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website