Upheld: Poor service in handling Power of Attorney; inadequate account access and management for vulnerable customer; delays in PoA registration; lack of responsiveness to attorney and solicitor communications complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr K suffered a medical crisis in July 2025 and became incapacitated. Mrs K obtained Power of Attorney to manage his finances but Revolut took two months to register it and failed to respond meaningfully to her or her solicitors' repeated contact attempts. Although Revolut's policy does not permit direct attorney access to accounts, the ombudsman found Revolut provided poor service by failing to understand Mr K's vulnerable circumstances, locking his account while sending contradictory instructions, and providing only partial account information. The ombudsman upheld the complaint and awarded £500 compensation for distress and inconvenience, declining to award legal costs as some expense is inherent to PoA management, though acknowledging Revolut's poor responsiveness contributed to the need for solicitor involvement.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Revolut provided poor service in multiple respects: (1) a two-month delay in registering the PoA despite receiving it multiple times and having confirmed receipt in August; (2) lack of response to Mrs K and her solicitors about Revolut's actions regarding the PoA; (3) sending contradictory messages instructing Mrs K to log into a locked account; (4) failing to absorb Mr K's vulnerable circumstances or show understanding of how to handle the PoA within its own constraints. While the ombudsman acknowledged that as the FOS is not a regulator it cannot require Revolut to change its system architecture or grant direct attorney access, it found that Revolut could have done more to protect Mr K as a vulnerable customer within its existing constraints. The service failures caused considerable distress and inconvenience over many weeks, warranting compensation of £500. The ombudsman declined to award costs for legal fees as some legal expense is inherent to PoA management, though acknowledged Revolut's poor responsiveness contributed to the need for solicitor involvement.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website