Veste

Not upheld: failure to make reasonable adjustments and complaint handling delay complaint against J.P. Morgan Europe Limited (trading as Chase)

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6384906 of 2026-06-04T00:00:00+00:00. failure to make reasonable adjustments and complaint handling delay complaint against J.P. Morgan Europe Limited (trading as Chase). Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6384906
Decision date2026-06-04T00:00:00+00:00
FirmJ.P. Morgan Europe Limited (trading as Chase)
ProductCurrent account
Claim typefailure to make reasonable adjustments and complaint handling delay
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNone ordered. Chase's agreement to use email in future and its apology for the delay in addressing the complaint were considered reasonable responses.

Summary

Mr K, a hard of hearing customer with a mental condition affecting portal access, complained that Chase failed to send a holding message by email on 14 October 2025 despite his documented preference for email communication. Chase acknowledged the complaint on 25 October 2025, apologised for the delay, and agreed to use email in future as a reasonable adjustment. The ombudsman found that Chase's response was reasonable and that the one-day delay in accessing the message did not merit compensation, resulting in the complaint being not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Banks have a duty to make reasonable adjustments for customers with disabilities. Chase's agreement to use email communication after learning of Mr K's difficulty with the portal constituted a reasonable adjustment. The characterisation of this as an exception was appropriate as Mr K would be treated differently from other customers. The one-day delay in accessing the message did not cause sufficient impact to merit compensation, and Chase's acknowledgement and apology for the delay in handling the complaint was reasonable.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
J.P. Morgan Europe Limited (trading as Chase), all decisions3516%
Current account, all decisions45,59019%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website