Not upheld: APP scam reimbursement claim complaint against Monzo Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr J paid a £180 deposit to an individual (C) to secure a meeting. When Mr J needed to reschedule, C demanded an additional deposit, which Mr J refused. Mr J then requested a refund of the original £180, which C declined. Mr J reported this to Monzo as an APP scam, but Monzo concluded it was a civil dispute and declined reimbursement under the Reimbursement Rules. The ombudsman upheld Monzo's decision, finding that the transaction did not constitute an APP scam because Mr J paid the intended recipient for the intended purpose, and any dispute about the deposit's refundability is a private civil matter between the parties.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Mr J paid the intended recipient (C) for the intended purpose (a deposit for a meeting). The Reimbursement Rules define an APP scam as involving criminal deception where either the recipient is not who the consumer intended to pay or the payment is not for the intended purpose. Neither condition was met here. While there may have been unclear terms about the deposit's refundability, this does not demonstrate that C intended to scam Mr J from the outset. The dispute is a private civil matter between Mr J and C, which is explicitly excluded from the Reimbursement Rules.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website