Not upheld: scam / fraud - unauthorized payment and complaint handling complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W fell victim to a scam in 2021, making two payments totalling 190 Euros for goods never received via Revolut's faster payment service. He raised a claim in January 2022, which Revolut declined, but later offered a goodwill refund of 190 Euros plus 8% simple interest when the complaint was referred to the FOS. Mr W rejected this offer, seeking additional compensation for the extended period without funds and claiming Revolut had a legal duty to reimburse him. The ombudsman found that the payments were not sufficiently unusual to require intervention, Revolut was not a signatory to the voluntary CRM Code, and the goodwill offer already exceeded Revolut's legal obligations. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Payment Services Regulations 2017, noting that Mr W was responsible for authorized payments he instructed. The CRM Code provided some protection for APP scams but was voluntary and Revolut was not a signatory. The payments were not sufficiently unusual or out of character to require Revolut to intervene before processing. Revolut's closure of the recipient account demonstrated reasonable post-scam investigation procedures, not a requirement to prevent the original payments. The delay in complaint resolution was not solely caused by Revolut, as Mr W was informed of his complaint rights in January 2022 but did not formally complain until November 2025. Revolut's goodwill offers exceeded what was legally required.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website