Not upheld: CIFAS fraud marker lodgement; account closure complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr L complained that Revolut Ltd improperly lodged a CIFAS fraud marker on his record after receiving a fraud notification from another bank regarding a football ticket purchase. The marker was based on approximately £60 in payments credited to Mr L's account. Revolut had sent Mr L an in-app message requesting information before lodging the marker, but Mr L did not respond. In early 2026, after Mr L provided evidence that he had repaid the funds, Revolut removed the marker. By this time, Mr L's job offer had been initially withdrawn, though it was subsequently reinstated after the marker was removed, resulting in a seven-week employment delay. The ombudsman found that Revolut had reasonable grounds to lodge the marker and followed proper procedures, and therefore did not uphold Mr L's complaint or award compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Revolut had reasonable grounds to believe fraud had been committed based on the notification from another bank. Revolut followed proper procedure by sending Mr L an in-app message requesting information before lodging the marker. Although Mr L did not respond to this message, the ombudsman was satisfied that Mr L would have been able to access and respond to it despite his account being blocked. The ombudsman noted that Mr L never queried the account closures over the following years, suggesting he did not take steps to investigate. The ombudsman rejected the argument that the marker was disproportionate given the £60 amount involved, as CIFAS rules contain no financial threshold. The ombudsman concluded that Revolut acted properly and that compensation was not warranted.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website