Not upheld: CIFAS fraud marker lodgement; account blocking of government payments complaint against Starling Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained that Starling Bank improperly lodged a CIFAS fraud marker on his account after receiving reports that two customers from other banks had sent him money (£75 and £150) following purchase scams. Mr M had told Starling these were civil disputes and requested account closure, then disengaged from further communication. Starling removed the marker in 2025 and paid £100 compensation, but Mr M sought £2,000-£3,500. The ombudsman found Starling failed to meet the evidential standard required for lodging a CIFAS marker but upheld the £100 compensation as appropriate, considering Mr M's deliberate disengagement and his ability to access alternative payment arrangements.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Starling failed to meet the required evidential standard to lodge a CIFAS marker, which requires clear, relevant and rigorous evidence that an identified fraud was committed and the account holder was involved. However, the ombudsman considered that Mr M's deliberate disengagement from Starling's inquiries, despite knowing disputes had been raised, partially explained Starling's actions. The ombudsman noted that Mr M had alternative means to receive Universal Credit payments and that other credit factors may have affected his ability to open accounts. The £100 compensation for the account blocking issue was deemed appropriate.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website