Not upheld: Authorised Push Payment (APP) scam - reimbursement claim and fraud prevention complaint against Santander UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs K lost approximately £20,000 to an investment scam involving company M, making payments via W (a money remittance service). Santander intervened on 9 January 2025 and explicitly told Mrs K she was being scammed, but she continued making payments while misleading Santander about their purpose. The ombudsman found that the Reimbursement Rules do not apply because payments were made to W in its own name as a remittance intermediary, not to a relevant account. Although Santander could have intervened earlier, such intervention would not have prevented Mrs K's loss given her determination to continue despite clear warnings. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The Reimbursement Rules do not apply because the payments were made to W (a PSP) in its own name acting as a remittance intermediary, not to a 'relevant account' as defined by the rules. While Santander could arguably have intervened earlier, such intervention would not have prevented Mrs K's loss because she was explicitly warned on 9 January 2025 that she was being scammed, yet continued making payments and was dishonest with Santander about the purpose. Mrs K's vulnerability, while contributing to her falling victim to the scam, does not entitle her to a refund outside the Reimbursement Rules framework, and Santander was not aware of her vulnerabilities until after the scam occurred.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website