Not upheld: Authorised Push Payment (APP) scam claim / refund request complaint against Bank of Scotland plc trading as Halifax

Decision detail

Summary

Miss B paid a builder £10,000 in June 2025 for building work and materials, but became dissatisfied when delivered bricks were defective and mismatched. When the builder refused a refund, Miss B claimed she had been scammed and requested reimbursement from Halifax under the Faster Payments Scheme Reimbursement Rules. Halifax declined, treating it as a civil dispute. The ombudsman upheld Halifax's decision, finding that while Miss B did not receive satisfactory work, the evidence does not support that the builder intended to defraud her from the outset, as the builder attended the property, commenced work, and the beneficiary account showed legitimate building industry activity with no other fraud reports or substantive police investigation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Reimbursement Rules definition of an APP scam, which requires either that the recipient is not who the consumer intended to pay, or the payment is not for the purpose intended. Miss B paid who she intended (S) for the purpose she intended (building services and materials). While the work was incomplete and materials defective, this constitutes a civil dispute over quality and performance rather than criminal fraud. The ombudsman found no convincing evidence of S's intent to defraud, noting that S attended the property, commenced work, the beneficiary account showed legitimate building industry activity, no other fraud reports existed, and relevant authorities did not pursue substantive investigation. The breakdown was more consistent with poor trader performance or relationship breakdown than premeditated fraud.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website