Not upheld: Authorised Push Payment (APP) scam claim - refund request complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs S paid a builder trading as 'V' a total of £85,050 between November 2024 and May 2025 for property works. Work was incomplete and of poor quality, leading Mrs S to claim she had been scammed. Barclays declined to refund the payments, and the FOS upheld this decision. The ombudsman found that although Mrs S was dissatisfied with the work, the payments were made to the intended recipient for the stated purpose of building works, making this a civil dispute rather than an Authorised Push Payment scam covered by the Reimbursement Rules. No convincing evidence of criminal deception or intent to defraud was found.

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 the consumer intended. Mrs S paid the person she intended (V) and the payments were made for the stated purpose of building works. Although work was incomplete and of poor quality, this constitutes a civil dispute rather than fraud. The ombudsman found no convincing evidence of criminal deception or intent to defraud. The lack of substantive investigation or charges by authorities, combined with evidence that V's bank account showed legitimate building trade activity, supported the conclusion that this was a civil matter rather than an APP scam.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website