Veste

Not upheld: account blocking and restriction; compliance with regulatory obligations complaint against ICICI Bank UK Plc

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6352224 of 2026-06-02T00:00:00+00:00. account blocking and restriction; compliance with regulatory obligations complaint against ICICI Bank UK Plc. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6352224
Decision date2026-06-02T00:00:00+00:00
FirmICICI Bank UK Plc
Productcurrent account, savings account
Claim typeaccount blocking and restriction; compliance with regulatory obligations
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNone. No compensation or further action ordered.

Summary

Mr O complained that ICICI Bank UK Plc unfairly blocked his current and savings accounts from April 2025 for approximately one year, causing him financial and practical hardship. He argued the extended restriction was disproportionate and indicated poor diligence in the review process. ICICI maintained the block was necessary to comply with UK financial regulations requiring verification of transaction purposes and fund origins. The ombudsman found that ICICI's actions were justified by legal and regulatory obligations, that confidential evidence showed no procedural delays, and that the bank fairly continued paying interest on deposit accounts throughout the restriction period. The complaint was not upheld and no compensation was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that ICICI's blocking of the accounts was justified by legal and regulatory obligations under UK legislation. While acknowledging the lengthy restriction period was difficult for Mr O, the ombudsman concluded that the bank was entitled to take the time necessary to comply with its obligations and that confidential evidence provided by ICICI demonstrated no delays in their processes. The ombudsman found that ICICI acted fairly in continuing to pay interest on deposit accounts and returning all funds with accrued interest.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
ICICI Bank UK Plc, all decisions4721%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website