Joanne didn't have a computer and wanted to use a mobile app to access her mum's account. But the bank said she had to use online banking.
What happened
Some years ago, Vera appointed her daughter, Joanne, under a power of attorney (POA). This was so Joanne could make decisions on Vera’s behalf, including about financial matters, if Vera ever lost mental capacity.
While she still had mental capacity, Vera registered the POA with her bank and gave Joanne permission to use her banking login details. Joanne used these to get mobile banking access on her phone. Vera continued to use the online banking platform to manage her affairs.
When Vera was diagnosed with dementia, she moved to a care home. Joanne continued to use the mobile app to log into her mum’s account and pay her bills. But then Joanne tried to make a very large payment, which the bank’s fraud detection systems blocked because it looked unusual.
Joanne called the bank and satisfied it that the payment was genuine and there was no fraud risk.
The bank told Joanne that – according to the account’s terms and conditions – she shouldn’t have or be using Vera’s login details. It cancelled them, telling her she could access Vera’s accounts in her own right online – but only through the desktop banking platform.
Because she didn’t have a personal computer or laptop, Joanne tried logging into the desktop platform on her mobile phone. She kept getting error messages, but the bank couldn’t tell her why or give her an alternative solution.
Joanne complained to the bank and, unhappy with their response, brought her complaint to us.
What we said
Vera had legally appointed Joanne to act as her representative and Joanne had been managing Vera’s finances appropriately. But the account terms and conditions said that, to prevent misuse of the account, customers should not share their login details.
So, we thought the bank had acted fairly when it cancelled Vera’s login and issued a new one to Joanne.
The design of the bank’s desktop platform allowed customers – including those with accessibility needs – to access their account from a browser on a mobile phone. So, we were satisfied it was fair to expect Joanne to use the desktop platform to access her mother’s account.
But we noted the bank had not offered Joanne as an attorney the same level of support we’d have expected them to give a customer. This was despite Joanne telling them she was having problems managing her mother’s account in line with the POA appointment.
Mediating between Joanne and her mother’s bank, we asked the bank to help Joanne access and use the desktop platform on her mobile phone. They did. Joanne told us this was really helpful and she no longer felt she needed access to the mobile banking app.
The bank also apologised and admitted it should have supported Joanne when she first got in touch. In recognition of this – and to make up for the distress and inconvenience she had suffered – the bank offered Joanne £200 compensation.
We put this to Joanne, and she was happy to accept it.