Not upheld: chargeback handling and potential fraudulent transactions complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest)

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs W complained about how NatWest handled a refund claim for several debit card transactions made to supplier 'F' in April 2025. Mrs W claimed she never authorized these transactions and suspected the merchant was an unlicensed casino operating under a false merchant category code. NatWest raised a chargeback under the 'Goods or Services Not Provided' reason code, but the merchant disputed this, providing evidence that an account was created, terms were accepted, and services were accessed and used following 3D Secure authentication. The ombudsman found insufficient evidence to support Mrs W's allegations and determined that NatWest did not have reasonable prospects of success in pursuing the chargeback claim further, therefore not upholding the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while chargeback is good practice where there are reasonable grounds for success, it is not guaranteed and is governed by card scheme rules. The ombudsman examined whether the transactions met chargeback requirements under Mastercard rules. Although Mrs W raised concerns about the merchant being an unlicensed casino, the ombudsman found insufficient evidence to support this claim. The merchant provided consistent evidence that services were purchased and used following 3D Secure authentication. The ombudsman found no persuasive evidence that an incorrect MCC was used or that the transactions should have been blocked as gambling-related. Therefore, NatWest did not have reasonable prospects of success in pursuing the chargeback claim further.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website