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

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S complained that Revolut unfairly recorded a Cifas fraud marker against him and closed his account after he received multiple payments that were later reported as fraudulent by other banks. Mr S claimed he was manipulated by a friend and did not know the funds were illegitimate, providing screenshots and changing explanations for the transactions. The ombudsman found Mr S's account showed a suspicious pattern of multiple payments from different sources entering and quickly exiting, combined with inconsistent explanations and insufficient supporting evidence. The ombudsman concluded that Revolut had strong, rigorous evidence to justify the marker and account closure, and therefore did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found Mr S's explanations inconsistent and unconvincing. The pattern of multiple payments from different sources entering and quickly exiting the account, combined with Mr S's changing story and lack of tangible supporting evidence from before the payments occurred, suggested he knew more about the transactions than he was willing to disclose. The ombudsman concluded that the suspicious nature of the activity would have been reasonably apparent to Mr S, and that Revolut's evidence was clear, relevant, and rigorous enough to justify the Cifas marker.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website