Not upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Metro Bank PLC

Decision detail

Summary

V, represented by director Mr M, complained that Metro Bank failed to provide accessible access to a Subject Access Request for several months due to repeated password failures. Metro Bank issued the SAR in May 2025 with a password, but Mr M did not report issues until January 2026. The firm tested the password and confirmed it worked, reissued it, and offered alternative delivery methods including branch support and postal delivery after address verification. The ombudsman found Metro Bank had issued the request within correct timescales and made reasonable attempts to resolve the issue, concluding the alternative options offered were fair despite Mr M's preference for digital format and distance to branch.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Metro Bank issued the SAR within the correct legal timescales and made reasonable attempts to resolve the access issue, including testing the password, reissuing it, requesting error screenshots, and offering alternative delivery methods. While the firm's telephony agent made an error in not providing the password when Mr M called, this was rectified quickly. The ombudsman concluded that since the passwords provided by Metro Bank worked when tested by the firm, the issue likely stemmed from Mr M's device or usage rather than the firm's provision. The alternative options offered (in-branch support or postal delivery after address verification) were deemed reasonable given the firm's security obligations and the sensitive nature of the data.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website