Not upheld: unauthorised transactions / disputed payments complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained to Barclays about two unauthorised bank transfers totalling over £900 made from his account in November 2025. He initially claimed he didn't make the payments, but later suggested a guest at his party may have watched him enter his passcode and used it to make the transfers. Barclays declined to refund the payments, noting they were made using Mr M's registered biometrics rather than his passcode. The ombudsman upheld Barclays' decision, finding that the payments were properly authenticated using Mr M's genuine biometrics on his registered phone and app, and that the evidence strongly substantiates Mr M consented to the transfers. The ombudsman rejected alternative fraud explanations as implausible and noted the payment patterns were not characteristic of fraudulent activity.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied an objective test of consent based on whether the customer used the agreed method for making payments. The evidence demonstrated that the payments were properly authenticated using Mr M's genuine biometrics on his registered phone and app. Since only Mr M could realistically have used his own biometrics, and the biometrics had not been compromised or changed, the evidence strongly substantiates that Mr M consented to the payments. The ombudsman rejected alternative explanations (such as a guest observing the passcode) as implausible given that biometrics, not passcode, were used. The ombudsman also noted that the payment patterns, timing, and amounts were not characteristic of fraud, and that Mr M's later inability to recall making the payments could be explained by his consumption of alcohol at the time.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website