CIFAS vs SIRA marker: what is the difference? ↗
Compares the two databases, including who controls each and where a challenge is directed, and notes a person can have both types of marker at once, each needing its own challenge.
Law-firm insights linked, not copied.
Specialist solicitors write about these cases every week. We collect the useful pieces, summarise each in a line, and link to the firm's own article. To keep it balanced, no firm has more than 2 pieces per topic here. Inclusion is not an endorsement.
Understanding CIFAS markers
What is a SIRA marker and can it be challenged? ↗
Explains that a SIRA marker is an entry on a separate fraud prevention database run by Synectics Solutions, is not a criminal conviction, and may be challenged if inaccurate or unfair, starting with a subject access request.
Challenging and removing a marker
CIFAS markers in 2026: what Fraudscape data reveals and how to challenge an unfair marker ↗
Summarises the 2025 filing figures from Fraudscape, how long markers can last, and a three-step route to challenge one: a subject access request, evidence from the filing firm, then a targeted appeal or Ombudsman complaint.
CIFAS Markers Explained: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions ↗
Explains why a CIFAS marker may be recorded, how long different marker types last, and the steps for challenging one: a subject access request, contacting the organisation that filed it, then escalating to Cifas or the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Cifas Markers - The Reality Check ↗
The firm’s view on appealing Cifas markers: complain to the filing organisation, then Cifas, then the Ombudsman or, in limited cases, the Business Banking Resolution Service. It says the Ombudsman cannot consider many such cases, for example business accounts, and lists consequences such as debanking and credit refusal.
CIFAS Marker Removal Explained ↗
Describes what Cifas markers are, the marker types and how long they can last, and the usual steps for challenging one: getting the Cifas record, asking the filing organisation for its evidence, making representations, then escalating to Cifas or the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Closed, frozen and de-banked accounts
What is the difference between a restraint order and an account freezing order? ↗
Explains that restraint orders can cover all of a person's assets while account freezing orders target named accounts for up to two years, that both are often made without notice, and that variation or discharge may be sought.
Is a US-style wave of crypto de-banking hitting the UK? Part 2 ↗
Discusses reports that UK banks block or delay a large share of payments to crypto exchanges, industry concerns about blanket restrictions, and options for challenging closures or blocked payments.
Reputation, Misinformation And Limits Of De-Banking Reform ↗
Argues that banks often close accounts on unverified compliance-database or press information and give little explanation. Reports the April 2025 HM Treasury announcement of 90 days’ notice and a clear reason, and says basic accounts are limited, notably not available to businesses. Written mainly for high-profile clients.
Bank account closures and CIFAS markers ↗
Transcript of a Which? Money podcast episode on bank account closures and CIFAS markers. Covers why banks close accounts with little explanation, that customers may not be told a marker has been recorded, and the steps discussed: asking for reasons, subject access requests, a complaint, then the Ombudsman and Cifas.
Six years of Account Freezing Orders: how are they working? ↗
Reviews how account freezing orders under the Criminal Finances Act 2017 have been used, comparing amounts frozen and forfeited in 2021/22, and sets out tactics for account holders, including early representations, negotiation, and the risk that information given may be used later.