Not upheld: CIFAS fraud marker lodgement complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss M complained that Revolut improperly lodged a CIFAS fraud marker against her after her account received high-value payments from an individual who claimed to be a victim of a romance scam. Miss M explained she was acting as an intermediary for her niece and the niece's boyfriend, receiving a 10% cut from each transaction. The ombudsman found that Revolut had sufficient evidence to lodge the marker, as Miss M's own evidence showed she had misgivings about the arrangement, continued it despite those concerns, and benefited financially from the transactions. The complaint was not upheld and the marker was not removed.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the CIFAS requirements that there must be reasonable grounds to believe an identified fraud or financial crime was committed and the evidence must be clear, relevant and rigorous. The ombudsman found that while Miss M claimed to be merely an intermediary, the evidence showed she had misgivings about the arrangement, continued it anyway, and benefited from a 10% cut on each transaction. This, combined with the fraud notification from the other bank and the romance scam context, provided sufficient grounds for the CIFAS marker.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website