‘Mainly, you fast fooded’: Monzo under fire over ‘shaming’ year-end reviews

When does lighthearted banter become inappropriate and humiliating?The digital bank Monzo has been accused of overstepping the mark by using the data it holds to tell one customer with a past eating disorder that she eats a lot of fast food, spends “more than most” on Just Eat takeaways, and had banished her life goals thanks to her spending choices.Fiona Taylor* has escalated a complaint to the UK financial ombudsman after she was offended by what she called “shaming language” in the end-of-year review sent to her by the bank.In a similar vein to Spotify Wrapped, which shows users of the streaming service their top songs and artists of the past year, Monzo sends customers a personalised annual review of how and where they spent their money.The aim, says the bank, is to “provide an engaging and sometimes lighthearted summary of a customer’s year” – but it has divided opinion.On forums such as Reddit, some customers have criticised the Year in Monzo service for “judging” them and making “snarky” and “sarcastic” comments, while others said they were “just a bit of fun”.Some customers shared screenshots from their reviews that highlighted how much money they spend at the bakery chain Greggs or tease them for having an “unused oven”.Taylor, 42, from Kent, said Monzo had used her financial information to “generate humiliating behavioural commentary” that “crossed into personal and moral judgment”. She claimed this was not appropriate behaviour for a bank and amounted to a misuse of personal data.Fiona Taylor said Monzo used her data to ‘generate humiliating behavioural commentary’. Photograph: SuppliedHer personalised spending review describes her 2025 as “a year of glory and folly”. It features a lot of references to food – telling her: “You foraged and feasted. But mainly, you fast fooded.”It then said she was “in the top 15%” for Just Eat, adding: “You like your banquets beige and boxed up.”This appears to be a reference to a “beige” diet dominated by bland or processed foods such as chicken nuggets, chips and pasta.It later returned to this theme, telling her: “You spent more than most on Just Eat. Did somebody say just stop?”The latter sentence is a reference to the food delivery company’s “Did somebody say Just Eat” ad slogan – but Taylor said it implied that her spending “should have been curtailed”.She said she lives with chronic fatigue, which affects her ability to cook and get to the shops and means she often relies on delivery apps for groceries and takeaways. She has also previously experienced an eating disorder and said: “Commentary that framed my food-related spending in a mocking or judgmental manner was particularly distressing and unwelcome.”The Monzo review commented on Taylor’s Just Eat spending. Photograph: SuppliedTaylor said this was not information Monzo could have known, which is why the comments interpreting her data were inappropriate. “A bank cannot know the medical, personal or trauma-related context behind spending decisions.”Her review also had a section on leisure spending that stated: “You banished boredom. And your life goals, thanks to your entertainment choices.”She said the life goals reference was upsetting as she had recently experienced “a significant career setback” and the comment “compounded feelings of loss and failure”.On Reddit forums, some Monzo customers expressed pride at being named among the biggest spenders at their local pub or chicken shop, but others were not so happy.One said “the world sucks right now” and they did not need the bank telling them “how I threw my life goals away … The wrapped just felt like it was ‘kicking us while we were down’”.Taylor said the comments ‘compounded feelings of loss and failure’. Photograph: SuppliedWhen Taylor contacted Monzo with her concerns, it told her that it “didn’t find evidence to support your complaint”. The letter from its complaint specialist went on to say: “I recognise that in your case, the automated and standardised language we used was inappropriate and caused genuine upset.” It said that to put things right, it would pay her £20 as a gesture of goodwill.Taylor then complained to the Financial Ombudsman Service, but its investigator effectively sided with Monzo, saying they did not think the bank needed to take any action. She appealed against the decision and her case will now be reviewed by a senior ombudsman, who will make a final decision.The bank argues that Year in Monzo features automatically generated content based on spending patterns, not personalised commentary written by a human.A Monzo spokesperson said: “It was never our intention to cause upset here, and we’re really sorry this happened.“While Year in Monzo is designed to be an entertaining recap of people’s spending and is positively received by millions of our customers, it’s completely optional, and individuals can choose to opt out of receiving theirs if they prefer.”* Name has been changed