Not upheld: unauthorized transactions and account closure notification complaint against Nationwide Building Society
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6158689 of 2026-04-16T00:00:00+00:00. unauthorized transactions and account closure notification complaint against Nationwide Building Society. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6158689 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-16T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Nationwide Building Society |
| Product | current account |
| Claim type | unauthorized transactions and account closure notification |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | None. Complaint not upheld. |
Summary
Mr S complained that Nationwide Building Society wrongfully declined to refund approximately £4,000 in disputed transactions made via digital wallet token between July and November 2024, and that they closed his accounts without proper notification. Mr S claimed his phones were confiscated by his school between May and August 2024, preventing him from authorizing the transactions. Nationwide declined the refund claim, finding the transactions were authorized using Mr S's genuine device with proper authentication. The ombudsman found the complaint not upheld, determining that Mr S's timeline of phone confiscation was inconsistent with evidence he used the same device for accepted transactions in June 2024, that it was implausible an unknown third party could access his device and biometrics, and that Nationwide properly attempted to notify him of account closure.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that the transactions were properly authenticated using Mr S's genuine device with two-factor authentication. The timeline of Mr S's claimed phone confiscation (May-August 2024) was inconsistent with evidence that the same digital token was used for genuine transactions in June 2024 that Mr S accepted. The ombudsman considered it implausible that an unknown third party could access Mr S's device, passcode, and biometric information without detection, particularly given the thousands of possible passcode combinations and the uniqueness of biometrics. The fact that bank transfers were made to people known to Mr S, combined with Mr S's biometric access to online banking during the period and the four-month delay in reporting, further supported that Mr S authorized the transactions. Regarding account closure, Nationwide properly attempted notification through letter and phone calls.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Nationwide Building Society, all decisions | 13,230 | 21% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website