Not upheld: fraud prevention marker application complaint against AutoMoney Trust Limited trading as AutoMoney Motor Finance

Decision detail

Summary

Mr D complained that AutoMoney Motor Finance unfairly recorded a fraud prevention marker against him following a declined car finance application in October 2023. AMF had received bank statements from Mr D's broker that contained discrepancies when verified with Mr D's actual bank records, including a missing income transaction and mismatched running balance. The ombudsman found that AMF had sufficient evidence to load the marker without needing to prove fraud beyond reasonable doubt, and that Mr D was responsible for the accuracy of documents he submitted. The complaint was not upheld, and the ombudsman found no basis for AMF to reconsider the fraud marker.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that AMF had sufficient evidence to load the fraud marker without needing to prove fraud beyond all reasonable doubt. The bank's verification that the submitted statement contained false information (missing income transaction and incorrect running balance) provided clear, relevant and rigorous evidence. Since the statement Mr D sent to the broker was identical to the one AMF received, Mr D was responsible for its accuracy. The ombudsman concluded AMF had more than mere suspicion and had tested the evidence appropriately by contacting the bank. The ombudsman did not require AMF to contact Mr D before loading the marker or to conduct forensic examination of the documents.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website