The burden falls on the institution

In CIFAS marker disputes, the burden of proof falls on the organisation that filed the marker. They must justify why the marker was placed — you do not have to prove you are innocent. This is a fundamental principle that many people misunderstand.

The institution placed a record on a national database alleging fraud. They must be able to demonstrate that this allegation is supported by evidence. If they cannot, the marker should be removed.

How this works at the Financial Ombudsman

At the FOS, the ombudsman will ask the institution to explain the basis for the marker and provide their evidence. If the institution's evidence is weak, incomplete, or does not demonstrate dishonesty, the ombudsman can order the marker to be removed.

Our analysis of 1,657 FOS decisions shows that markers are frequently overturned where the institution cannot adequately demonstrate the evidence supporting the marker. The complaint does not need to prove innocence — it needs to show that the institution's case is insufficient.

How this works at court

At court, the position is even stronger. Under UK GDPR, the data controller (the institution) bears the burden of demonstrating that the personal data is accurate. If they cannot prove the marker accurately reflects what happened, the court can order its removal and award damages.