Not upheld: scam/fraud - reimbursement claim for cryptocurrency transfers complaint against Revolut Ltd
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6099943 of 2026-04-22T00:00:00+00:00. scam/fraud - reimbursement claim for cryptocurrency transfers complaint against Revolut Ltd. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6099943 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-22T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Revolut Ltd |
| Product | payment account with cryptocurrency exchange functionality |
| Claim type | scam/fraud - reimbursement claim for cryptocurrency transfers |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | None. Complaint not upheld. No reimbursement directed. |
Summary
Ms A fell victim to a sophisticated employment scam in July 2025 where fraudsters posed as employers and investment mentors, directing her to set up a Revolut account and transfer funds to cryptocurrency platforms, resulting in losses of £5,480. Revolut intervened on the first cryptocurrency withdrawal, asking questions about pressure and investment sources, providing scam warnings, holding funds for three hours, and requiring a risk agreement signature. When Ms A made subsequent transfers, Revolut again questioned her and requested wallet evidence. Ms A's responses did not accurately reflect her situation as she had been coached by the fraudsters on how to answer. The ombudsman found Revolut's protective measures were proportionate to the identified risk and that Ms A's inaccurate responses prevented further detection of the scam. The complaint was not upheld as Revolut could not be held liable for the losses.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
Revolut took proportionate steps to protect Ms A by identifying fraud risk, asking specific questions about pressure, source of opportunity, and investment instructions, providing warnings, holding funds for three hours, and requiring a risk agreement. Although Ms A had a learning difficulty, Revolut was unaware of this at the time and therefore could not be expected to act differently. Ms A's inaccurate responses to Revolut's questions (stating she was not being guided when she was, and selecting 'friends and family' as source) prevented Revolut from identifying the true risk. The questioning was proportionate given Revolut processes thousands of genuine similar transactions daily and had no baseline account activity to identify unusual patterns. Recovery prospects were minimal due to cryptocurrency being unregulated and funds being transferred to external wallets beyond Revolut's control.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Revolut Ltd, all decisions | 3,791 | 18% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website