Not upheld: account closure and fraud marker registration complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss A complained that Revolut closed her account and registered a Cifas fraud marker without justification. Revolut had identified fraudulent funds entering Miss A's account and registered a marker for misuse of facility. Miss A claimed the funds were repayment for tuition costs she had helped a parent pay, but gave changing explanations to Revolut and provided incomplete, secondhand documentation. The ombudsman found Miss A's account not credible, particularly given her changing story, the incomplete evidence, and her immediate onward transmission of the funds. The ombudsman concluded Revolut had reasonable grounds to believe Miss A was deliberately complicit in receiving fraudulent funds and therefore was justified in closing the account and registering the Cifas marker.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the legal test for Cifas markers, requiring reasonable grounds to believe a fraud or financial crime was committed, with clear, relevant and rigorous evidence of deliberate complicity rather than mere unwitting receipt. The ombudsman found Miss A's account not credible due to: (1) changing explanations for the transactions; (2) incomplete and secondhand documentation; (3) immediate onward transmission of funds; and (4) confidential information about the payments. These factors collectively demonstrated deliberate complicity rather than unwitting involvement, justifying both the account closure and Cifas marker registration.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website