Not upheld: Card / payment disputes complaint against Starling Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms M purchased flights through online travel agent T in September 2025 for £1,263.03 and cancelled them following schedule changes. T refunded £633.52 but retained £629.51 in cancellation fees. Ms M requested Starling raise a chargeback, but Starling declined, concluding the claim had little prospect of success under Mastercard rules. The ombudsman found Starling acted fairly because the dispute concerned refund entitlement after voluntary cancellation (not failure to provide services), T's terms disclosed cancellation fees, and Ms M failed to provide the missing booking confirmation pages that would contain material evidence of what terms were disclosed at purchase. No remedy was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman assessed whether Starling fairly applied Mastercard chargeback reason codes. Under the 'goods or services not provided' code, the dispute did not fit as T had issued tickets; the issue was refund entitlement after Ms M's voluntary cancellation. Under the 'goods or services not as described' code, T's terms clearly disclosed cancellation fees and T complied with its contractual obligation to help procure a refund from the airline. Under the travel services cancellation code, the key question was whether cancellation fees were properly disclosed, but Ms M failed to provide the missing booking confirmation pages that would contain material evidence of what was disclosed. Without this documentation or stronger evidence, Starling reasonably concluded the claim had little prospect of success. While Starling's initial response could have been more thorough, its subsequent investigation was fair and it appropriately requested the missing evidence.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website