Not upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Barclays Bank UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

M complained that Barclays allowed its former director Mr J to retain read-only access to M's bank accounts from December 2019 until June 2025, despite a 2022 KYC review confirming he was no longer associated with the company. Barclays admitted the error and offered £300 compensation, but Mr M rejected this, seeking disclosure of exactly what information Mr J accessed and claiming damages for Mr J's subsequent use of that information in private loan disputes and legal claims. The ombudsman upheld the complaint in principle but found no evidence of financial loss caused by Barclays' error, as Mr J's subsequent actions were independent decisions for which the bank should not be held responsible. The ombudsman upheld the £300 compensation offer as fair for the inconvenience caused.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

While Barclays' error in failing to remove Mr J's access was admitted, the ombudsman found no evidence that M suffered any quantifiable financial loss as a result. The ombudsman distinguished between the bank's procedural failure and any actual harm to M, noting that Mr J's subsequent actions (withholding loans, pressuring for funding, initiating legal claims) were Mr J's independent decisions for which Barclays should not be held responsible. The ombudsman also noted that disputes between Mr M and Mr J are matters for the courts, not the FOS.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website