Not upheld: fraud prevention database reporting; alleged unauthorized mortgage application complaint against Santander UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C complained that Santander incorrectly reported him to Cifas fraud prevention database in connection with a mortgage application he claims he did not make. Santander had received a fraudulent application supported by false bank statements and payslips, and a unique PIN sent to Mr C's home address was used to progress the application online. Mr C argued he was unaware of the application and never received the PIN, suggesting a family member may have been responsible. The ombudsman found Santander's report was fair and reasonable because the combination of a fraudulent application and the use of a PIN sent to Mr C's address gave rise to reasonable suspicion of his involvement, and rejected the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the legal standard for Cifas reporting: clear, relevant and rigorous evidence giving rise to reasonable suspicion of fraud. The ombudsman found it reasonable for Santander to conclude Mr C was party to the application because: (1) a fraudulent application with false documents was submitted directly to Santander; (2) a unique PIN was sent to Mr C's home address; and (3) that PIN was used to progress the application and provide detailed responses. The ombudsman rejected the argument that the marker should be removed, noting that while it was possible a household member intercepted the PIN, it was equally possible Mr C himself was the applicant. The standard for reasonable suspicion remained met.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website