Partially upheld: incorrect information provision and withdrawal restrictions complaint against eToro (UK) Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained to eToro about a $25 withdrawal fee from his USD investment account and his inability to withdraw funds back to his original payment method. eToro initially stated the eligibility period for returning funds to the original payment method was one year, but later confirmed it was actually six months for Mastercard transactions. The ombudsman found that while the withdrawal fees were properly disclosed and the intermediary banking charges were legitimate, eToro's provision of incorrect information about the eligibility period caused Mr B distress and inconvenience. The complaint was partially upheld, with eToro ordered to pay £100 in compensation for the misinformation, while the fee-related aspects of the complaint were not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that eToro's terms and conditions clearly state that restrictions may apply to withdrawing funds back to the original payment method, and the six-month limit for Mastercard transactions is applied in line with card scheme and processing rules. The $25 fee was charged by an intermediary bank and is separate from eToro's $5 withdrawal fee, both of which are clearly disclosed. However, eToro provided incorrect information about the eligibility period in its initial response, stating one year when the correct period was six months. This failure to provide accurate information in the first instance caused distress and inconvenience to Mr B.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website