Not upheld: Cifas marker registration for misuse of facility complaint against Monzo Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Miss U complained that Monzo improperly registered a Cifas marker against her for misuse of facility after she received and transferred fraudulent funds at the request of an individual she was in a relationship with. Monzo had asked her to explain the source of the funds and was unsatisfied with her explanation that they came from a family member for 'upkeep'. The ombudsman found the complaint not upheld, determining that Monzo acted reasonably in recording and maintaining the marker. The ombudsman concluded that the funds were demonstrably fraudulent based on the sending bank's fraud report and that Miss U knew or ought to have known they were illegitimate, given her prior experience with account freezing and fraud warnings, the unexpectedly large amount received, her inability to provide credible explanations, and her continued willingness to receive funds despite earlier warnings.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Cifas test requiring reasonable grounds to believe involvement in fraud or financial crime, supported by clear, relevant and rigorous evidence. The ombudsman found: (1) sufficient evidence the funds were fraudulent based on the sending bank's fraud report, the pattern of activity, and Miss U's own admission she was deceived; and (2) Miss U knew or ought to have known the funds may be illegitimate based on multiple factors including her prior experience with account freezing and fraud warnings, the unexpectedly large amount received, her inability to provide credible explanations, her consultation with A before responding to Monzo, and her continued willingness to receive funds despite earlier warnings.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website