Veste

Not upheld: scam claim and refund request complaint against Santander UK Plc

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6214971 of 2026-04-17T00:00:00+00:00. scam claim and refund request complaint against Santander UK Plc. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6214971
Decision date2026-04-17T00:00:00+00:00
FirmSantander UK Plc
Productcurrent account
Claim typescam claim and refund request
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNo refund ordered. Santander's £30 compensation for providing incorrect information in its initial response letter was deemed fair and reasonable.

Summary

Miss G paid a tradesman £500 upfront for scaffolding work after the tradesman requested early payment. The tradesman subsequently removed existing scaffolding and failed to complete the agreed work. Miss G claimed this was a scam and requested a refund from Santander, but Santander declined, characterizing it as a civil dispute. The ombudsman upheld Santander's decision, finding that under the Payment Systems Regulator's Reimbursement Rules, this did not constitute an APP scam because Miss G was not deceived about the recipient's identity and both parties likely intended the payment for the same purpose. The ombudsman noted that while the tradesman's conduct was unprofessional and disappointing, acting unprofessionally is not the same as operating a scam, and the prior legitimate service provision and account operation patterns suggested a civil dispute over non-performance rather than fraud.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Payment Systems Regulator's Reimbursement Rules definition of APP scam, which requires either that the recipient was not who the consumer intended to pay or the payment was not for the purpose intended, and that this resulted from fraud or dishonesty. The ombudsman found that Miss G intended to pay the tradesman she had been dealing with (not a different entity), and both parties likely intended the payment to be for scaffolding work. While the tradesman's failure to complete the work was disappointing, the evidence did not safely establish that the tradesman never intended to provide the service or that the payment was made for a different purpose than intended. The prior legitimate service provision, the account operation patterns, and lack of external investigation findings all suggested this was a civil dispute over non-performance rather than a scam involving deception about identity or purpose.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Santander UK Plc, all decisions14,40522%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website