Not upheld: unauthorized transactions / fraud claim complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H complained that NatWest should refund £12,755.13 in disputed transactions he claimed were made by an unauthorized individual using remote access software he had downloaded in October 2023. Mr H initially told NatWest that his wife approved the transactions, but later changed his account to claim she only approved one by mistake. NatWest's fraud detection systems flagged four transactions on 29 February 2024 as high risk, and Mr H told the bank at that time that he was investing in gold stocks and shares. The ombudsman found on the balance of probabilities that Mr H authorized all transactions through his wife's approval in the NatWest app, based on his initial statements, technical evidence, and the implausibility of remote access software being used over nine months. The complaint was not upheld, and no refund was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found on the balance of probabilities that Mr H authorized all disputed transactions through his wife's approval in the NatWest app. This conclusion was based on: (1) Mr H's initial account to NatWest that his wife approved the transactions; (2) technical evidence showing all transactions were approved following active participation within the app with successful logins; (3) Mr H's awareness of multiple transactions demonstrated during the 29 February 2024 call; and (4) the implausibility of remote access software being used to make unauthorized transactions over nine months. The ombudsman found NatWest's intervention on 29 February 2024 was appropriate, though not as detailed as it could have been. However, the ombudsman found no evidence that the transactions were actually part of a scam or that Mr H suffered a loss, and therefore did not require NatWest to attempt recovery.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website