Not upheld: scam and fraud - refund claim complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W complained that Revolut failed to refund money he lost to a scam involving payments to what he believed was a legitimate task-based job. Revolut intervened on several payments and questioned Mr W about their purpose, but Mr W provided inaccurate information, stating the payments were to a friend and for business testing purposes, and denied being approached about online task-based work when directly asked. The ombudsman found that Mr W's false and inconsistent answers hindered Revolut's ability to identify the fraud and that the story he presented was sufficiently plausible to satisfy the advisor's concerns. Although Mr W claimed vulnerability due to unemployment, Revolut was unaware of this as Mr W stated the payments were work-related. The complaint was not upheld as Revolut could not have prevented the losses given Mr W's deliberate concealment of the true purpose of the payments.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Although Revolut should have been concerned about the payment pattern and intervened appropriately, Mr W provided inaccurate and inconsistent answers during the interventions. He falsely stated the payments were to a friend and for business testing purposes, when they were actually for an online task-based job scam. When directly asked if he had been approached about online task-based work, he answered no. These false statements hindered Revolut's ability to identify the scam and provide appropriate warnings. The story Mr W presented was plausible given the detail he provided, and while the advisor could have asked follow-up questions, Mr W likely would have provided persuasive explanations. Revolut was not aware of Mr W's vulnerability and could not have reasonably identified it from the call. Therefore, Revolut could not have prevented the losses.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website