FCA Finds 238,396 Suspected Money Mule Customers Offboarded in 2025

Financial firms in the United Kingdom closed 238,396 customer accounts linked to suspected money mule activity in 2025, according to a review published by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) on 23 September 2026. The regulator’s findings also show that fraud proceeds commonly pass through multiple mule accounts before being withdrawn or otherwise converted into usable funds.

The figures were collected through a survey of 35 financial services firms, including retail banks, building societies, challenger banks, payment institutions and electronic money institutions. The FCA also analysed payment flows through a public-private working group established in 2025, which examined 140 cases spanning seven types of fraud.

The number of customers offboarded for suspected mule activity increased from 184,935 in 2023 to 233,269 in 2024 and 238,396 in 2025. The 2025 total was 5,127 higher than the previous year. Across the three-year period, the surveyed firms reported 656,600 customer offboardings.

The FCA cautioned that the rise in closures does not necessarily mean that money mule activity represents a growing share of firms’ customer bases. Changes in customer numbers and improvements in firms’ ability to identify and act on suspected activity may also affect the totals.

Retail banks and building societies accounted for 56.1% of suspected mule customers offboarded in 2025, while challenger banks accounted for 33%. The regulator reported that most affected accounts were personal accounts, representing approximately 92% of closures over the three-year period.

The survey also identified differences by age group. Customers aged 26 to 39 accounted for the largest number of suspected mule account closures. However, the sharpest increase between 2024 and 2025 was among customers aged 40 to 49: closures in that group rose from 25,760 to 37,274. Customers aged 25 and under accounted for 85,425 closures in 2025.

The FCA noted that the profile of suspected mule customers varied across types of financial institution. At challenger banks, closures were more concentrated among younger customers, while retail banks reported a more even distribution across age groups. Where gender data was available, around two-thirds of suspected mule customers were men, a proportion that remained broadly stable during the three years.

The data has limitations: firms did not all collect the same customer information, and some customers did not disclose it. The survey also recorded the tenure of accounts that were closed, rather than when the suspected mule activity began. As a result, it cannot establish whether longer-standing accounts had been used for mule activity throughout their existence or were misused only later.

The FCA’s separate analysis of payment flows focused on how fraud proceeds moved through networks of accounts and where criminals converted or withdrew the funds. In the cases examined, cashing out was concentrated between the second and fifth mule accounts in a chain, with the highest concentration at the second account. The regulator said that some proceeds passed through longer chains, but the funds were often cashed out before reaching later stages.

The review found that some accounts had been used repeatedly for suspected mule activity and across different types of fraud. This pattern suggested to the FCA that some accounts were part of established criminal infrastructure rather than being used only for isolated or opportunistic transactions.

Card payments were the most common cash-out method identified in the analysis. They included numerous low-value transactions as well as higher-value payments to local businesses and retailers. The FCA observed that card spending can resemble ordinary consumer activity, making the movement of criminal proceeds more difficult to identify and trace.

International transfers and cryptocurrency were also used to cash out funds. The FCA found that international destinations included South Asia, West Africa and the Middle East. Cryptocurrency cash-outs were less frequent than other methods but tended to involve higher values, indicating that they were used selectively in the cases analysed.

The regulator also identified differences between institution types. Retail banks accounted for higher transaction volumes passing through mule accounts, while non-retail firms, including payment and e-money institutions, saw lower volumes but higher-value transactions. The FCA said these differences point to varying patterns of activity and cash-out behaviour across financial services providers.

The FCA distinguished account closures from filings to the National Fraud Database, which is maintained by Cifas. Closing an account on suspicion of mule activity does not necessarily mean that the evidence meets the threshold for a database filing. Cifas members must have reasonable grounds to believe that fraud or financial crime has been committed or attempted, supported by clear, relevant and rigorous evidence.

Across the three-year period, firms reported 113,655 National Fraud Database filings. In 2025, 15.3% of offboarded customers were also filed, compared with 17.4% in 2024. The FCA’s review therefore treats offboarding and database reporting as distinct measures rather than interchangeable indicators.

The FCA connected the findings to the broader scale of money laundering in the UK. The National Crime Agency estimates that more than £100 billion is laundered through the UK or UK corporate structures each year. Money mule accounts are one means by which criminal proceeds can be received, transferred and moved through the financial system.

The regulator said the results reinforce the importance of firms understanding how funds move both within their own institutions and between different providers. It highlighted opportunities for more information-sharing about suspected mule accounts, including through voluntary provisions under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023.

The FCA expects firms to consider the findings in the context of their own business models, customer bases and exposure to mule activity. It said firms should review their controls in light of changing methods and patterns, and consider indicators beyond the first receiving account, including linked accounts, transaction characteristics and the wider payment context.

The FCA is working with the National Economic Crime Centre to issue an alert to relevant firms providing further details of the working group’s findings. It also said it will continue to monitor firms’ approaches through supervisory work to assess how they respond to evolving money mule threats.

The review provides a snapshot of suspected mule activity reported by participating firms and of the payment routes examined in the 140 cases. The FCA’s figures relate to identified and reported account closures, and should not be interpreted as a count of all money mules operating in the UK or as a measure of the total value of funds moved through mule accounts.

By fLEXI tEAM