Not upheld: scam and fraud - bank's failure to prevent complaint against The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W complained that RBS failed to prevent him losing money to a scam involving payments he believed were for a legitimate investment. RBS intervened on two larger payments (£10,000 and £50,000) and spoke to Mr W, who stated the funds were for a luxury holiday abroad with his wife. The ombudsman found RBS asked proportionate questions and Mr W's responses were plausible and gave no indication of vulnerability or deception. Although Mr W was experiencing personal difficulties and was on medication, he did not disclose this to RBS. The ombudsman concluded RBS could not have prevented the losses and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that RBS struck an appropriate balance between identifying potentially fraudulent payments and minimizing disruption to legitimate transactions. The bank appropriately intervened on the two larger payments and asked a proportionate number of questions. Mr W's responses about funding a luxury holiday were plausible and gave no indication of vulnerability or deception. There was nothing in the calls or branch interactions that would have alerted RBS to Mr W's actual circumstances. The ombudsman was not persuaded RBS should have done more or could have prevented the losses.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website