Not upheld: Cifas marker application - alleged misuse of facility complaint against Monzo Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr V complained that Monzo Bank Limited unfairly applied a Cifas marker (Misuse of Facility) against his name and subsequently closed his account. Mr V had received a fraudulent payment and provided two different explanations: first that a friend was repaying a debt, and later that it was linked to an online game where he could sell items. The ombudsman found that the payment was indeed fraudulent based on a fraud report provided to Monzo, and that Mr V's inconsistent explanations, lack of supporting evidence, and the misalignment between his account and Monzo's information meant it was more likely than not that Mr V knew the payment was or might be fraudulent. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

For a Cifas marker (Misuse of Facility) to be fairly applied, the firm must have reasonable grounds to believe fraud or financial crime was committed and the evidence must be clear, relevant and rigorous. The ombudsman was satisfied the payment was fraudulent based on the fraud report. Mr V's inconsistent explanations (friend repaying debt versus in-game item sale), inability to provide supporting evidence, and the fact his account did not align with information Monzo received about the transaction, led the ombudsman to conclude it was more likely than not that Mr V knew the payment was or might be fraudulent.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website