Not upheld: Cifas marker registration for misuse of facility complaint against Monzo Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr K complained that Monzo unfairly recorded a Cifas marker against him for misuse of facility after his account received fraudulent funds. Mr K claimed he was an unwitting money mule who believed he was participating in a legitimate investment opportunity. However, the ombudsman found that while Mr K may have initially been duped, his subsequent actions—including providing falsified cryptocurrency trading screenshots, lying to Monzo when questioned, continuing to accept payments after the account was flagged, and deliberately using other accounts to avoid using his main account—demonstrated he knew or should have known the funds were illegitimate. The ombudsman concluded Monzo had clear, relevant and rigorous evidence to support the Cifas marker and acted fairly in its decision.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Cifas evidential standard requiring 'clear, relevant and rigorous' evidence that the consumer was aware the payments were or might be from an illegitimate source. While accepting Mr K may initially have been duped, the ombudsman found that his subsequent conduct—providing falsified evidence, being instructed to lie to a regulated firm, continuing payments after the account was queried, and deliberately avoiding his main account—demonstrated he knew or should have known the funds were illegitimate. The ombudsman rejected Mr K's claims of coercion as unsupported by clear evidence.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website