Not upheld: customer service complaint; alleged unfair treatment in branch complaint against Clydesdale Bank Plc, trading as Virgin Money

Decision detail

Summary

Miss W, a survivor of domestic and economic abuse, complained about how she was treated by Virgin Money staff during a branch visit in October 2025. She had previously complained to Virgin in 2023 about losses resulting from her ex-partner's coercive control, but that complaint was referred to FOS outside the applicable time limits and deemed outside FOS jurisdiction. During the October 2025 branch visit, Miss W raised her abuse history with staff, who provided explanations about the FSCS, printed her statements, and offered a private space. The ombudsman found that while Virgin's staff could have proactively sought information about her previous complaint, the service provided was reasonable and not unfair. The ombudsman noted that Virgin appropriately updated Miss W's profile to flag her mental health needs and provided information about support charities, demonstrating it took her concerns seriously.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Virgin's staff provided reasonable service by explaining the FSCS role, printing statements, and offering a private space. While the ABM's use of 'darling' could be perceived as patronising, the ombudsman was not persuaded it was intended to offend given the ABM's submission that she uses the term with all customers. The ombudsman acknowledged that Virgin could not take action on the 2023 complaint as it was outside FOS jurisdiction and had already received a final response. The ombudsman noted that Virgin demonstrated concern by updating Miss W's profile for mental health support and providing information about support charities. The call handler was found to be sympathetic and balanced in acknowledging Virgin's previous response while being empathetic.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website