Not upheld: service failure and poor customer communication complaint against Bank of Scotland plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr and Mrs M complained to the FOS about Bank of Scotland's handling of a cheque that was rejected as potentially fraudulent due to an altered payee name, and the subsequent temporary block placed on their account. When Mr M called BoS on 25 June seeking an explanation for the rejection, the advisor provided insufficient assistance and referred him elsewhere, leaving the couple without answers until they received a letter on 28 June. The ombudsman found that BoS's fraud prevention actions were appropriate and justified, but agreed that the customer service was poor because the advisor could have sourced the information for Mr M. The ombudsman upheld the £50 compensation already agreed by BoS as fair and reasonable for the service failure, rejecting the couple's request for a higher amount.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that BoS's decision to reject the cheque and apply a fraud block were appropriate fraud prevention measures justified by the altered cheque and inability to contact Mrs M. However, the ombudsman agreed that BoS's customer service was deficient because when Mr M called on 25 June seeking an explanation, the advisor should have sourced the information rather than referring him elsewhere, leaving Mr and Mrs M without answers for three days until the letter arrived. The ombudsman noted that while a fraud block should ideally have been applied sooner, no actual harm resulted as no fraudulent activity occurred. The £50 compensation was deemed fair for the service failure in not assisting Mr M adequately.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website