Not upheld: account access restriction / fraud prevention measures complaint against HSBC UK Bank Plc trading as first direct

Decision detail

Summary

Mr G complained that first direct was unfairly restricting his account access by requiring prior approval before he could make payments. first direct had imposed these restrictions due to concerns that Mr G was at particular risk of fraud, with ongoing police enquiries and previous Banking Protocol involvement. The ombudsman found that while the restriction was inconvenient, it was proportionate and reasonable given the documented fraud risk, was permitted under the account terms, and enabled first direct to fulfil its safeguarding obligations. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that first direct must comply with legal and regulatory obligations to protect customers from financial harm and prevent fraud. While the restriction was inconvenient for Mr G, requiring him to ring first direct for approval of payments was proportionate and reasonable. The available evidence supported first direct's concerns about fraud risk, and the account terms and conditions permitted first direct to refuse payment instructions and block account access in these circumstances. The ombudsman was satisfied that first direct's restrictions were imposed reasonably and in line with the account terms.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website