Not upheld: unauthorized transactions / disputed withdrawals complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC trading as Barclaycard

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M disputed £580 in ATM withdrawals made between 28 July and 1 August 2024 on his Barclaycard credit card, claiming they were unauthorized. Barclaycard refused to refund the transactions, noting the card had not been reported lost or stolen and the genuine card and PIN were used. The ombudsman found that while it was possible a family member with knowledge of Mr M's safe combination (which matched his PIN) could have made the withdrawals without authorization, Mr M's repeated assertions that no one he knows would do this, combined with insufficient evidence of unauthorized third-party involvement, meant the ombudsman could not fairly conclude the transactions were unauthorized. The complaint was not upheld and no refund was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Payment Services Regulations 2017 and Consumer Credit Act 1974, determining that the payment service provider is liable only if the customer did not authorize the payments. The evidence showed Mr M's genuine card and correct PIN were used for all transactions, making chip cloning highly unlikely. While the ombudsman acknowledged it was possible a family member with knowledge of the safe combination and PIN could have made the withdrawals without Mr M's knowledge, Mr M's repeated assertions that no one he knows would do this, combined with the lack of persuasive evidence of unauthorized third-party involvement, meant the ombudsman could not fairly conclude the transactions were made by an unauthorized party. Therefore, Barclaycard was not liable for the refund.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website