Not upheld: account closure, service failure, safeguarding procedures complaint against Lloyds Bank PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs A complained that Lloyds Bank unfairly closed her accounts and provided poor service after she reported her mobile device as stolen. Following the theft report, Lloyds restricted her internet banking access and required multiple branch visits for verification before restoring access. Mrs A made comments about ending her relationship with Lloyds due to service issues, after which the bank decided to close her accounts with 65 days' notice. Mrs A, who is vulnerable with health concerns and cares for her husband, requested an extension to the notice period but was refused. The ombudsman found Lloyds acted fairly, as the security procedures were justified by safeguarding duties, the account closure was a legitimate commercial decision based on the broken relationship, and the notice period complied with terms and conditions.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Lloyds' restrictions on internet banking were justified by its duty to safeguard accounts following the mobile device theft. The bank's procedures requiring in-branch verification were fair and reasonable security measures. The account closure was a legitimate commercial decision as the relationship had broken down, evidenced by Mrs A's numerous complaints and expressed dissatisfaction. The 65-day notice period complied with the account terms and conditions, and Mrs A had adequate time to make alternative arrangements. The ombudsman clarified that while discrimination claims cannot be determined by FOS, fairness and reasonableness can be assessed considering the Equality Act 2010.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website