Not upheld: authorised push payment (APP) scam / fraud reimbursement complaint against Barclays Bank UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr O complained that Barclays Bank UK Plc failed to reimburse him after he reported being the victim of a romance scam perpetrated by Ms M, from whom he had transferred over £220,000 over several years. Barclays declined reimbursement, characterising the matter as a private civil dispute rather than a scam. The ombudsman considered whether the payments constituted an authorised push payment (APP) scam under the Contingent Reimbursement Model Code, requiring proof on the balance of probabilities that Ms M dishonestly deceived Mr O. The ombudsman found the circumstances atypical of romance scams and noted the absence of communications evidence and police action, concluding the threshold for establishing fraud had not been met. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the civil standard of proof (balance of probabilities) to determine whether Mr O was the victim of an APP scam. To establish fraud, there must be a misalignment between Mr O's purpose for the payments and Ms M's purpose in procuring them, due to dishonest deception. The ombudsman found the circumstances atypical of romance scams: payments spread over several years, regular face-to-face contact, Ms M not hiding her identity, and lack of evidence that funds were not used as described. The absence of communications evidence and police substantive action made it difficult to reach firm conclusions. While acknowledging the possibility of fraud, the ombudsman concluded the evidence did not meet the threshold of being more likely than not that fraud occurred.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website