Not upheld: Account administration errors complaint against Starling Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr E complained that Starling Bank incorrectly displayed a digital wallet purchase as completed on 24 September instead of 16 September when he made the purchase, claiming this affected his ability to exercise consumer rights in an ongoing merchant dispute. Starling explained that the merchant had attempted the payment unsuccessfully on four occasions on 17 September and only successfully completed it on 24 September, which was the date correctly recorded in its system. The ombudsman upheld Starling's position, finding that the transaction date was correctly recorded as the completion date controlled by the merchant, that such delays are common industry practice, and that Mr E suffered no loss as he received his refund.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that Starling correctly recorded the transaction date as 24 September because that is when the merchant successfully completed the payment processing, not when Mr E initiated the purchase. Payment processing is merchant-led, not bank-led, and delays of several days are common industry practice. Even if an error had occurred, Mr E experienced no loss or detriment because he received his refund. The ombudsman also noted that complaint handling and customer service fall outside the FOS's jurisdiction under FCA DISP rules.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website