Not upheld: fraud marker application - alleged fraudulent documentation complaint against Great Western Credit Union Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr A complained that GWCU unfairly applied a Cifas fraud marker against his name after his personal loan application was declined in January 2023. GWCU required applicants to live or work in Bristol; Mr A claimed to work there but provided a payslip that appeared to have been altered to show Bristol as the location. When GWCU investigated, they identified three versions of the payslip with different locations and asked for further evidence, which Mr A did not provide. The ombudsman found GWCU had reasonable grounds to believe Mr A attempted fraudulent documentation and that the evidence was clear, relevant and rigorous, therefore not upholding the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Cifas standard requiring 'reasonable grounds to believe' rather than proof beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence showed the payslip had been altered to display Bristol as a location, with inconsistencies that Mr A's explanation about a PDF converter did not adequately account for. The ombudsman was not persuaded by Mr A's testimony, particularly because the second location only appeared during GWCU's investigation and there appeared to be insufficient space on the payslip for two locations. Mr A's failure to respond to requests for further evidence and his subsequent failure to provide any corroborating proof of Bristol employment strengthened the conclusion that GWCU had reasonable grounds for suspicion.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website