Not upheld: Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Western Union Payment Services GB Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms R fell victim to an investment scam in which scammers posed as representatives of an investment company, provided remote computer access, and showed her apparent trading profits to encourage further investment. In April 2024, Ms R made an international payment of £3,028.49 via Western Union, having been coached by the scammers on what to tell the payment service provider. When Ms R attempted to withdraw her funds, she discovered the scam and claimed reimbursement from Western Union. The ombudsman found that although Ms R was the victim of a cruel scam, Western Union acted fairly and reasonably in processing her authorised payment, as the one-off international transfer did not present obvious fraud indicators and the firm provided appropriate warnings and asked reasonable questions about the payment purpose and recipient relationship.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Payment Services Regulations 2017 framework, noting that Ms R authorised the payment and is responsible for it in the first instance. The payment was not an APP scam as it was an international cash transfer. While businesses should sometimes look beyond face value authorisation, the ombudsman found that a one-off international payment of this size did not present obvious fraud indicators that Western Union should have identified. The ombudsman noted that money transfer services lack the ongoing account monitoring capability of banks, making fraud detection inherently more difficult. Western Union provided appropriate warnings and asked reasonable questions. Although Ms R changed her answers during the telephone call, the ombudsman found Western Union could not reasonably have known she was being dishonest, as she would likely have satisfied questioning from other providers too. The language barrier claim did not change the conclusion as Ms R could have asked for clarification.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website