Not upheld: Account closure without notice complaint against Plus500 UK Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs M complained that Plus500 unreasonably closed her CFD trading account in August 2025 and sought reinstatement, refund of £77,300 in allegedly incorrect charges, and compensation for distress. Plus500 closed the account after reassessing Mrs M's financial circumstances and identifying vulnerability and affordability concerns, citing her modest income (£0-£15,000) and minimal assets (£0-£5,000). The ombudsman found Plus500 acted fairly in closing the account in line with Consumer Duty obligations, as CFDs are high-risk products unsuitable for customers with low financial resilience. Regarding the disputed charges from nearly 50,000 trades, the ombudsman declined to conduct the forensic transaction-by-transaction analysis Mrs M requested, finding such detailed investigation fell outside the Financial Ombudsman Service's remit and that Mrs M had agreed to the charging structure in the User Agreement. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Plus500 acted fairly and reasonably in closing Mrs M's account based on her limited financial resilience and vulnerability concerns, which aligned with Consumer Duty obligations to prevent foreseeable harm. CFDs are inherently high-risk products unsuitable for many retail investors, and Plus500 had discretion to determine who could use its platform. Regarding fees, the ombudsman determined that Mrs M agreed to the charges in the User Agreement and that a forensic transaction-by-transaction examination of 50,000 trades was beyond the scope and remit of the Financial Ombudsman Service, which was designed for quick resolution with minimum formality rather than complex technical investigations.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website