Not upheld: Card / payment disputes complaint against PaySend PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S complained that PaySend took 45 hours to process a £13,000 international payment to his mother, exceeding their stated service standards and causing stress during Good Friday. He argued the verification checks were unnecessary and objected to night-time communications and potential data sharing with the USA. PaySend explained they required documents to comply with AML/KYC obligations and operated tiered checking levels. The ombudsman found that while PaySend caused a 10-hour initial delay, Mr S caused a 13-hour delay by not sending settled status evidence promptly and a further 6-hour delay by using a different email address, and that without these customer-caused delays the process would have taken approximately 25 hours, which was reasonable. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that PaySend's processes were reasonable and compliant with AML/KYC obligations. While PaySend caused an initial 10-hour delay in requesting documentation, Mr S was responsible for a 13-hour delay in not sending settled status evidence and a further 6-hour delay by using a different email address. Without these customer-caused delays, the process would have taken approximately 25 hours, which falls within a reasonable timescale. The ombudsman rejected arguments about data breaches, noting no evidence of improper data sharing, and found that 24/7 customer support justifying night-time communications was reasonable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website