Not upheld: scam reimbursement / Authorised Push Payment (APP) claim complaint against Monzo Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Miss M paid £2,000 to an individual B for an aesthetics course but claims she did not receive the full course and B lacked proper accreditation. She requested reimbursement from Monzo, which declined on the basis this was a civil dispute rather than a scam. The ombudsman reviewed communications between Miss M and B which showed training was started and materials were provided over a five-month period. Finding no convincing evidence of criminal fraud or dishonesty, the ombudsman upheld Monzo's classification of the matter as a civil dispute and did not require reimbursement.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the APP scam definition under FPS and CHAPS reimbursement rules, which requires evidence of criminal deception. The available communications suggested Miss M received at least partial training and materials over a five-month period, indicating some service was provided. There was no convincing evidence of criminal fraud or dishonesty. B appeared to be a practising beautician with a physical studio and registered company. The dispute appeared to be a civil matter regarding service delivery rather than a scam involving criminal deception.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website