Partially upheld: Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Revolut Ltd
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6127527 of 2026-06-19T00:00:00+00:00. Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Revolut Ltd. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6127527 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-19T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Revolut Ltd |
| Product | Current account |
| Claim type | Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | Revolut Ltd must pay Miss Y £91.25 (the difference between £145.25 that should have been reimbursed and £54 already paid) plus interest at 8% simple per year from 4 July 2025 until settlement, within 28 days of Miss Y's acceptance of the decision. |
Summary
Miss Y was victim of an APP scam in June 2025 after responding to a fake job advert. She made 4 Faster Payments totalling £256 and 4 card payments to a cryptocurrency exchange totalling £2,173.08, receiving only £102 in credits. Revolut reimbursed £54 for the Faster Payments under the Reimbursement Rules but refused to reimburse the card payments or card fees. The ombudsman found Revolut's intervention was proportionate and that card payments fell outside the Reimbursement Rules with no viable chargeback claim. However, the ombudsman upheld the complaint in part because Revolut incorrectly apportioned the credits received, and should have reimbursed £145.25 rather than £54 for the Faster Payments, requiring an additional payment of £91.25 plus interest.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied the Faster Payment Scheme Reimbursement Rules to determine liability. While Miss Y authorised the payments, the Reimbursement Rules require reimbursement for APP scam Faster Payments. The key issue was the correct apportionment of credits received during the scam. The ombudsman found that credits should be applied pro-rata across all payments (Faster Payments and card payments) as they were part of a single scam. This resulted in a net loss of £245.25 from Faster Payments, and after the £100 excess, Revolut should have reimbursed £145.25 rather than £54. Card payments fell outside the Reimbursement Rules and chargeback was not viable because the cryptocurrency exchange provided the services paid for. Revolut's intervention was proportionate given the information available to it.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Revolut Ltd, all decisions | 3,893 | 18% |
| Fraud reimbursement (APP scams), all decisions | 20,976 | 21% |
| Current account, all decisions | 52,014 | 19% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website