The Financial Services Ombudsman, Joe Meade, has asked the Irish Financial Regulatory Services Authority to investigate the introduction of improved monitoring of accounts held by elderly people after an 80-year-old woman's bank account was cleared out in a fraud.

Over a period of 10 days, €700 was withdrawn from the account every day using the woman's card and PIN, although she had moved into a nursing home and had never used her card or PIN to withdraw money.

Mr Meade said he was "somewhat disturbed" to learn that the bank had no system in place to alert it to the possibility that a fraud might be taking place.

The bank has now updated its account monitoring procedures in response to proposals put to it by the ombudsman.

Mr Meade has alerted the financial regulator to what he said appeared to be a possible systemic problem involving all financial services providers in relation to the accounts of elderly people who are immobilised or in care.

It is understood that discussions have taken place with the Irish Banking Federation (IBF) about the possibility of introducing fraud alert mechanisms where the account holder is aged 65 and over and where accounts that have not been active for some time are suddenly subject to frequent, large withdrawals.

A spokeswoman for the financial regulator said it examined all matters brought to its attention by the ombudsman and would take further action if appropriate.

Case studies of complaints received by Mr Meade's office published yesterday included a €16,500 compensation award after a mortgage broker did not disclose that the property it had recommended to buy as an investment was actually owned by the broker's principal shareholder.

Other cases included a €140,000 death benefit settlement following an error by an insurance broker and an award of €40,000 against a stockbroker who mismanaged a portfolio by investing too heavily in high-risk tech shares.

An accident cash plan benefit of €90,000 was awarded in a case after an insurer rejected a claim because it said the insured person had committed an illegal act. Mr Meade ruled that this was for the courts to decide. The insurer has since paid out on the claim.