Upheld: poor customer service, unclear communication, access to banking services complaint against J.P. Morgan Europe Limited trading as Chase

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs N complained that Chase made it difficult to install its banking app on her new phone because her identification was in her maiden name while her account was in her married name. Chase initially refused to accept her marriage certificate as proof of connection between the names, despite previously accepting it for account changes, and gave conflicting information about whether a manual review was possible. After 70 days involving multiple calls and e-chats, a manual review was completed and Mrs N gained access, but Chase's final response letter failed to mention this resolution and instead stated she must change either her account name or identification name. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding Chase's messaging inconsistent and unclear, and awarded £300 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused by the prolonged and poorly managed process.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found Chase provided inconsistent and unclear messaging to Mrs N throughout the process. While Chase's security policy requiring matching identification for app installation on new devices is legitimate, Chase failed to clearly explain the exceptions process, provided contradictory information about whether manual review was possible, and issued a final response letter that omitted information about the completed manual verification. The ombudsman noted that Mrs N's identification was in date (contrary to Chase's claims) and that the manual review ultimately succeeded, proving Chase's stated reasons for refusal were incorrect. The 70-day process requiring Mrs N to carry two devices and use hotspots constituted undue inconvenience that could have been avoided with clearer communication and proper application of the exceptions process.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website