Not upheld: account closure without notice and delays in fund release complaint against Monzo Bank Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6290528 of 2026-04-14T00:00:00+00:00. account closure without notice and delays in fund release complaint against Monzo Bank Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6290528 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-14T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Monzo Bank Limited |
| Product | current account |
| Claim type | account closure without notice and delays in fund release |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | £25 compensation offered by Monzo for delays in assessing the complaint (at T's discretion to accept or reject). |
Summary
T, a limited company, complained that Monzo Bank Limited closed their business account without notice in June 2025, blocking access to funds and causing operational disruption. T also complained about delays in retrieving the remaining balance. Monzo declined to explain the closure but offered £25 compensation for complaint handling delays. The ombudsman found that Monzo had reasonable concerns under their regulatory obligations and was entitled to close the account immediately under the account terms. The ombudsman was satisfied that no unreasonable delay occurred in releasing funds and upheld Monzo's right to make the closure decision, declining to uphold the complaint.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
Banks have legal and regulatory obligations to monitor accounts and mitigate financial risks. The account terms permitted Monzo to close the account with two months' notice for any reason, or immediately in limited circumstances. The ombudsman was satisfied that Monzo's concerns were reasonable and sufficient to justify immediate closure. While the closure was disruptive to T's business, Monzo was entitled to make this decision. The information requested to release funds was not onerous and there was no unreasonable delay in fund release.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Monzo Bank Limited, all decisions | 170 | 11% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website