Not upheld: alleged fraud and financial abuse; failure to protect vulnerable customer complaint against The Co-operative Bank Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs M's representative complained that Co-op Bank failed to protect Mrs M from financial harm when she withdrew £7,400 cash on 2 April 2025, allegedly under coercion by a third party. The representative argued that Co-op Bank staff should have recognised Mrs M's vulnerability (advanced age, apparent cognitive impairment, confusion) and prevented the withdrawal. However, Co-op Bank had no prior knowledge of Mrs M's dementia diagnosis or lack of mental capacity, and no Power of Attorney was in place at the time. The ombudsman found insufficient evidence that Mrs M was a victim of fraud or scam, noting that while the cash's destination is unknown, alternative explanations exist beyond fraudulent coercion. Without proof of fraud meeting the legal threshold, the ombudsman determined Co-op Bank properly executed Mrs M's withdrawal instructions and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Mrs M's representative's suspicions about coercion and fraud are understandable, there is insufficient evidence meeting the high legal threshold and burden of proof for fraud. Critically, there is no evidence confirming that the withdrawn cash went to a fraudster, and alternative explanations exist (such as Mrs M's own account that it was for fixing a problem and paying bills). Co-op Bank had no prior knowledge of Mrs M's vulnerabilities or lack of mental capacity in April 2025, and there is no evidence they failed to follow their proper procedures. Without proof of fraud or scam, Co-op Bank's primary obligation was simply to execute Mrs M's withdrawal instructions, which they did.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website