Not upheld: scam / fraud - refund claim for unauthorised payments complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Ms G fell victim to a fake job scam after being contacted on a messaging app by a scammer who convinced her to pay funds to a task platform using cryptocurrency. She received an initial commission payment which reinforced her belief in the legitimacy of the opportunity. When she realised she had been scammed and requested a refund from Revolut, the bank refused. The ombudsman found that although Revolut should have been aware of potential fraud risks and intervened appropriately by asking questions and providing warnings, it could not have prevented the loss because Ms G was heavily influenced by the scammer and deliberately provided false information to Revolut (claiming the payments were for investment rather than employment). The ombudsman concluded that Ms G's lack of honesty and the scammer's strong influence meant she would have found alternative ways to send the funds even if Revolut had blocked the payments.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that although Revolut should have monitored for fraud risks and had systems to detect unusual transactions, it could not have prevented Ms G's loss because she was heavily influenced by the scammer and deliberately misled Revolut about the purpose of her payments. When Revolut intervened and asked questions, Ms G provided inaccurate information (claiming investment rather than employment). The scammer's influence was so strong that Ms G followed his instructions to mislead banks and was evasive when asked for supporting documentation. Even if Revolut had given more accurate warnings based on truthful information, the scammer's control over Ms G meant she would likely have found alternative ways to make the payments, as evidenced by her switching to Revolut when another bank blocked payments.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website