Not upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Metro Bank PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs B, representing the estate of her late husband Mr B, complained that Metro Bank provided poor service and breached data protection rules when handling notification of Mr B's death. The main complaint centered on a 15 October 2025 branch meeting where Mrs B alleged the staff member was rude and discussed the account in a public area. Mrs B also disputed Metro's internal notes and raised concerns about information shared with her daughter. The ombudsman found that while the branch interaction likely fell below Metro's normal service standards, the bank followed correct bereavement procedures and appropriately handled information sharing with the authorized family member. Ultimately, the complaint was not upheld, and no compensation was awarded because FOS rules restrict compensation to eligible complainants, and the estate cannot suffer distress as an inanimate entity.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman acknowledged that while there was no contemporaneous evidence (such as audio CCTV) to verify the exact nature of the 15 October branch interaction, the fact that Mrs B raised a complaint during an already difficult time suggested the standard of service fell below Metro's normal expectations. However, the ombudsman found that Metro was following correct bereavement procedures in requiring original death certificates and that the information sharing with Mrs B's daughter was permissible given her explicit authorization. Critically, the ombudsman determined that compensation could not be awarded because the complaint was brought by the estate of Mr B (an inanimate entity that cannot suffer distress), and FOS rules only allow compensation to eligible complainants, not to Mrs B personally.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website