Not upheld: Card / payment disputes complaint against Starling Bank Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

F, a limited company, complained that Starling Bank unreasonably declined to credit a £370 payment towards their bounce back loan in December 2025, instead requesting source of funds documentation. F argued the information request was excessive and invasive, and complained about receiving missed payment notifications despite having made the payment. Starling maintained they had legal and regulatory obligations to verify payment sources, particularly given that F no longer held a bank account with them following a previous relationship closure. The ombudsman upheld Starling's position, finding the information request reasonable and proportionate, and noting that Starling's commitment to adjust interest charges adequately addressed any detriment caused by the processing delay.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Starling's request for source of funds documentation was reasonable given their legal and regulatory obligations to monitor payments and combat financial harm. The fact that F no longer held a bank account with Starling made the information request particularly appropriate. The information requested (bank statements from the sending account) was not excessive or unduly onerous. While the frustration caused by missed payment notifications was acknowledged, Starling's commitment to adjust interest charges adequately addressed any detriment.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website