Not upheld: Fraud prevention - investment scam complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr G lost approximately £68,000 to an investment recovery scam over 10 months by purchasing cryptocurrency through a Revolut account and withdrawing it to external wallets controlled by scammers. He complained that Revolut should have prevented the losses through stronger intervention, particularly on a £12,700 transaction in February 2025. The ombudsman upheld a complaint against his bank, which paid 50% refund for losses from 18 February 2025 onwards, but rejected the Revolut complaint, finding that Revolut's automated warnings were proportionate and that human intervention would not have uncovered the scam given Mr G's lack of disclosure to his bank.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while the £12,700 transaction represented a significant increase, it was not sufficiently suspicious in isolation given the account had been used for several months for recurring cryptocurrency purchases in the thousands of pounds. The ombudsman reasoned that even if Revolut had intervened with human contact, it would not have uncovered the scam because Mr G had not been forthcoming with his bank about the underlying circumstances, and Revolut would not have had sufficient risk factors visible to prompt further probing. The ombudsman distinguished this from the bank's position, which had broader visibility of Mr G's overall financial circumstances.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website