Not upheld: Cifas marker application and account closure complaint against Starling Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr I complained that Starling Bank Limited unfairly applied a Cifas marker (Misuse of Facility) against his name after he received three fraudulent payments totalling £450 in November 2025. When questioned, Mr I provided inconsistent explanations: first claiming a friend from college contacted him about family bills and he passed the money on per instructions, then later claiming the payments were personal transfers relating to money owed by a friend. The ombudsman found that the fraud report confirmed the payments were fraudulent and that Mr I's contradictory accounts demonstrated he was likely aware of the fraudulent nature of the funds. Accordingly, the ombudsman upheld Starling's decision to apply the Cifas marker and close the account.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

For a Cifas marker to be applied fairly, the firm must have reasonable grounds to believe fraud was committed and show clear, relevant and rigorous evidence that the customer was deliberately dishonest. The ombudsman found the payment was fraudulent based on the fraud report. Mr I's inconsistent accounts of why he received the money (first claiming a phone conversation about family bills, then claiming personal transfers relating to money owed) tainted his credibility and indicated he was likely aware the payments were fraudulent.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website