Not upheld: fraud marker recording / account misuse complaint against HSBC UK Bank Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained that HSBC unfairly recorded a Cifas misuse of facility marker against him following receipt of fraudulent transfers in September 2020. Mr B claimed he was exploited as a 'money mule' and was naive and unaware of the illegality, requesting removal of the marker. HSBC maintained it had sufficient evidence of complicity and declined to remove the marker. The ombudsman found Mr B's account not credible, noting he had provided a false invoice to the bank, failed to mention vulnerability when claiming innocence, and used the funds for personal financial benefit. The ombudsman upheld HSBC's decision and declined to require removal of the marker.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found Mr B's account of events not credible. The key factors were: (1) Mr B provided a false invoice to HSBC, which he would have known was untrue at the time, indicating complicity; (2) if Mr B genuinely believed the activity was legitimate, he would have provided full details including his vulnerability at the time, but he did not; (3) the funds were used for personal financial benefit; (4) Mr B's claim that HSBC never contacted him was contradicted by evidence that he had submitted documentation in response to bank inquiries; (5) Mr B provided no tangible evidence to support claims of third-party involvement or exploitation. The ombudsman concluded the 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