Not upheld: account closure and Cifas marker registration following suspected fraud complaint against TSB Bank Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr G, a sole trader operating a car trading business, complained that TSB unfairly closed his business and personal accounts and registered a Cifas marker against him in September 2024. TSB had received a fraud report regarding payments of £14,000 and £50 received in January 2024 and requested proof of entitlement. Mr G provided invoices and other documentation claiming the payments were for a vehicle sold to a client in March 2024. However, the ombudsman found inconsistencies in Mr G's account: he initially stated he didn't know the sender or client, but later claimed the client was a family friend; the vehicle sale price was £47,750 but he only received £14,050 with no clear explanation of the remaining balance; and the sender's name did not match the invoice client's name. The ombudsman concluded TSB had reasonable grounds to suspect fraud and acted fairly in closing the accounts and registering the Cifas marker, which was later removed in March 2025 when Mr G provided additional evidence. The complaint was not upheld and no compensation was awarded.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that TSB had reasonable grounds to suspect fraud based on the fraud report it received. The ombudsman noted inconsistencies in Mr G's testimony: he initially stated he didn't know the sender or client, but later claimed the client was a family friend known since 2022. The ombudsman found it odd that Mr G only received £14,050 towards a £47,750 vehicle sale with no clear explanation of how the remaining balance was paid. The ombudsman concluded that Mr G had not provided sufficient proof of entitlement to the funds and that TSB met the burden of proof required to register the Cifas marker. The ombudsman noted that TSB's decision to remove the marker in March 2025 did not automatically establish Mr G's entitlement to the funds. The ombudsman found the immediate account closure appropriate given the fraud report and account terms, and found no evidence that TSB had shared Mr G's information with third parties or raised a chargeback.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website