Not upheld: Credit file / adverse marker disputes complaint against Zopa Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms A complained that Zopa Bank Limited unfairly lodged a CIFAS fraud marker against her following the suspension and closure of her newly opened account. Zopa had received a fraud notification that a £50 payment to Ms A's account was part of an investment scam, and noted the high volume of incoming payments and outgoing transfers within days of account opening. Ms A claimed the payments were from social media sales and that the £50 was from an overseas friend, but provided no documentary evidence such as messages or social media communications. The ombudsman upheld Zopa's decision, finding that the confirmed fraudulent payment source, transaction patterns, and lack of corroborating evidence provided reasonable grounds to believe Ms A was involved in fraud, meeting the threshold for CIFAS marker lodgement.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the CIFAS marker requirements: reasonable grounds to believe an identified fraud was committed and clear, relevant, rigorous evidence. The ombudsman found that Ms A received a payment from an investment scam, the sender's name did not match her claimed friend, she provided no documentary evidence of social media sales despite the high volume of claimed transactions, and she transferred substantial funds to another account. The pattern of activity, combined with the confirmed fraudulent source of at least one payment and lack of corroborating evidence for Ms A's explanations, satisfied the threshold for lodging a marker.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website