Upheld: service complaint, account management, unjustified alert marker placement, failure to investigate properly complaint against Nationwide Building Society Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Miss L complained about being refused entry to a Nationwide branch with her dog on 3 October and about staff refusing to deposit her cheque on her behalf. Nationwide responded by accusing her of being abusive and placed an alert marker on her account. Miss L requested CCTV footage be retained to prove her version of events, but Nationwide failed to retain it and provided contradictory information about its availability and retention periods. The ombudsman found that Nationwide's failure to properly investigate, combined with Miss L's consistent account and the firm's lack of transparency, meant the alert marker was unjustified. The ombudsman also found that staff could reasonably have deposited the cheque on her behalf, which would have avoided the entire complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that without access to CCTV footage, a full and fair investigation was not possible. However, based on the balance of probabilities and Miss L's consistent account throughout, the ombudsman was not convinced she had been abusive or behaved unreasonably. The ombudsman was concerned by Nationwide's lack of transparency, contradictory statements about CCTV availability and retention periods, failure to retain footage despite Miss L's explicit request and DSAR, and failure to properly investigate before placing the alert marker. The ombudsman also found that staff could reasonably have deposited the cheque on Miss L's behalf while she waited outside, which would have avoided the complaint entirely.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website