Not upheld: CIFAS fraud marker lodgement; suspected involvement in processing fraudulent funds complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr Y complained that Revolut improperly lodged a CIFAS fraud marker against him after his account received £1,000 from multiple sources following six fraud notifications from other banks. Mr Y claimed the funds were a gift from a friend's uncle to be passed to his friend, but admitted receiving money from four unknown sources and sending it to a third party he did not know. The ombudsman found Revolut had sufficient evidence that Mr Y was likely aware fraudulent funds were being processed through his account and that Revolut properly followed legal requirements for lodging the marker. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Revolut had sufficient evidence to lodge the CIFAS marker. Mr Y's explanation that funds were a gift from a friend's uncle did not match the reality that he received money from four different sources he did not know and sent it to a third party he also did not know. The ombudsman concluded that Mr Y was likely fully aware the funds were fraudulent, despite his claims of ignorance. Revolut met the legal requirements for lodging a marker: they had reasonable grounds to believe fraud was committed, clear and rigorous evidence, and Mr Y was given an opportunity to explain.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website