The rulebook is public

On its National Fraud Database Principles page, Cifas says cases filed to the database must be supported by evidence and must satisfy the four pillars of the standard of proof. That sentence may be the most important sentence on the site for anyone trying to understand a marker.

It tells you, in public, what a member organisation is supposed to have before it files a case.

The four pillars in plain English

• Reasonable grounds to believe fraud or financial crime has been committed or attempted
• Evidence that is clear, relevant, and rigorous
• Conduct that meets one of the recognised case types
• Rejection, withdrawal, or termination of a product on the basis of fraud unless an exception applies

Why 'reasonable grounds' matters

Reasonable grounds is not the same as a vague concern, a bad feeling, or a pattern that looked suspicious in a system. It implies a basis that can be articulated and defended.

That distinction shows up in published Ombudsman decisions. In TSB case DRN-2936455, the ombudsman said the bank had concerns but its notes did not show much more than mere suspicion of wrongdoing. The marker was removed.

Why 'clear, relevant and rigorous' matters

This phrase is where many cases are likely won or lost. If the evidence is incomplete, contradictory, weakly retained, too indirect, or unable to tie the customer to dishonest conduct, the filing starts to wobble.

That is exactly what happened in Monzo case DRN-4936783, where the Ombudsman said the bank had not shown the customer was involved in fraud or financial crime and concluded that the evidence was not clear and rigorous.

Why this guide supports the whole article system

Many online explainers treat the filing standard as background. It is not background. It is the centre of the dispute. If a marker is meant to satisfy a published evidence threshold, then the natural questions become: what exactly was alleged, what evidence supports it, does the conduct fit the case type, and what product decision was taken on the basis of fraud?

Those are not abstract legal questions. They are the questions that pull a complaint away from general protest and into something testable.

Sources behind this guide

• Cifas National Fraud Database Principles
• Financial Ombudsman decisions DRN-2936455 and DRN-4936783