Not upheld: disputed unauthorised transactions / fraud claim complaint against Capital One (Europe) plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr O complained that Capital One unfairly held him liable for £2,750 in ATM withdrawals and other transactions made between 6-16 October 2025 on a replacement credit card he claimed not to have received. Mr O alleged he was a victim of a SIM swap fraud. Capital One declined the claim, noting the transactions were authenticated using genuine Chip and PIN. The ombudsman reviewed extensive evidence including app login records, call recordings, transaction history, and verification texts, and concluded that Mr O most likely authorised the transactions himself, finding his SIM swap claim unconvincing and noting inconsistencies in his account (such as later admitting he made some of the disputed transactions). The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman concluded that while the transactions were properly authenticated via Chip and PIN, this alone does not prove authorisation without consent. However, the ombudsman found multiple pieces of evidence indicating Mr O likely authorised the transactions himself: the card was activated via his app using biometric authentication on his device; the PIN remained unchanged and would be difficult to guess; Mr O later admitted he made some of the smaller transactions on the same card he claimed not to receive; Capital One received a positive response to a verification text; the call recordings appeared to be Mr O requesting increased cash withdrawal limits; and the cash withdrawals occurred at locations Mr O had previously visited. The ombudsman was not persuaded by Mr O's SIM swap claim as it would not prevent app access, and Mr O retained his phone number throughout.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website