NatWest CIFAS Marker, Marker removed after escalation
The situation
NatWest placed a Misuse of Facility marker on T's record after flagging suspicious transactions. T's initial complaint was rejected with a generic response that did not address the specific arguments raised.
Our approach
After NatWest's rejection, we prepared simultaneous escalation to CIFAS and the Financial Ombudsman. The CIFAS complaint argued the member had not met filing standards. The FOS referral included the original complaint, NatWest's inadequate response, and additional evidence.
Issuer response
NatWest initially rejected with a template response that did not engage with the specific complaint arguments.
Escalation
Simultaneous escalation to CIFAS and FOS. NatWest agreed to remove the marker before the Ombudsman made a decision, likely because dual escalation created significant pressure.
Result
Marker removed 6 weeks after escalation. NatWest settled before FOS decision.
Key takeaway
Simultaneous escalation to CIFAS and the FOS creates maximum pressure. Many institutions will settle rather than face a potential adverse FOS ruling, especially when a CIFAS complaint about member conduct is also active.
Specialist CIFAS marker removal firm
Your case is different. Our strategy is designed to reflect that.
Professionally drafted complaint documents built around your specific marker, issuer, and evidence. Not a template letter. A four-stage strategy that escalates until the marker is addressed.