Not upheld: Card / payment disputes complaint against NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B disputed a £1,200 credit card transaction from April 2025, claiming he did not authorise it despite his card being in his possession and his PIN being known only to him. Mr B suspected a merchant working at his property may have compromised his card details, though he had paid the merchant in cash. The ombudsman found the transaction was properly authenticated and, on the balance of probabilities, was authorised by Mr B, likely through him sharing his card and PIN with the merchant. While acknowledging NatWest's service fell short in providing incorrect information, the ombudsman upheld NatWest's refusal to refund the transaction and endorsed their £200 compensation offer.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied a two-stage test: first establishing that the transaction was properly authenticated (which it was, using Mr B's card and PIN), and second determining whether it was authorised. While accepting that Mr B likely did not personally process the transaction, the ombudsman found no plausible explanation for how a third party could have obtained both the card and correctly guessed the PIN without Mr B's knowledge or consent. On the balance of probabilities, the ombudsman concluded the transaction was more likely made with Mr B's consent, making it authorised.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website