Not upheld: CIFAS marker recording; potential involvement in scam complaint against Barclays Bank UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained that Barclays unfairly recorded a CIFAS marker against him following receipt of £10,000 in payments that the remitting bank reported as resulting from a purchase scam. Mr M provided three different explanations for the payments: school fees, a car purchase, and visa sponsorship. Although Mr M later provided documentary evidence supporting the visa sponsorship account, the ombudsman found his testimony unreliable due to the multiple inconsistencies and could not verify the authenticity of the supporting evidence. The ombudsman upheld Barclays' decision to record the CIFAS marker and maintain it, finding the bank had sufficient grounds based on the scam notification and Mr M's failure to provide a consistent explanation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found Mr M's testimony unreliable and not credible due to multiple inconsistent accounts of the same events provided at different times. While Mr M provided additional documentary evidence, the ombudsman could not verify the authenticity of the call recordings or overcome concerns about the reliability of Mr M's evidence. Barclays had sufficient grounds to record the CIFAS marker based on the scam notification from the remitting bank and Mr M's failure to provide a consistent or plausible explanation.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website