Not upheld: scam claim and refund liability complaint against HSBC UK Bank Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Miss B paid individual T a total of £8,194 in April 2025 for e-commerce development and business services, but claimed she did not receive all the services and goods promised. She raised a scam claim with HSBC seeking a refund, which HSBC declined on the basis that this was a civil dispute. The ombudsman upheld HSBC's decision, finding that while Miss B did not receive all services paid for, T did provide some services (opening online accounts) and some stock, and later refunded £1,500, indicating this was a civil dispute over service delivery rather than an APP scam involving fraudulent deception as defined by the Faster Payment Scheme Reimbursement Rules.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Faster Payment Scheme Reimbursement Rules which require that for an APP scam to be covered, either the recipient must not be who the consumer intended to pay, or the payment must not be for the purpose the consumer intended. The payments went to the intended recipient (T) and while Miss B did not receive all services and goods paid for, the evidence shows T provided some services (opening accounts) and some stock, and later refunded £1,500. This indicates T did not set out with the intention to defraud from the outset. The situation constitutes a civil dispute over service quality and delivery rather than a scam involving fraudulent deception.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website