Not upheld: scam reimbursement - Authorised Push Payment (APP) scam claim complaint against Bank of Scotland plc trading as Halifax

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W made a payment in 2019 to Person A for an investment opportunity and by 2025 had not received any returns, leading him to believe he was the victim of a scam. He requested reimbursement from Halifax, which declined. The ombudsman found that while Mr W may have suffered a loss, the payment does not meet the Contingent Reimbursement Model Code definition of an Authorised Push Payment scam because there is insufficient evidence that Person A fraudulently obtained the funds rather than simply failing to deliver on the investment. The complaint was not upheld as the matter constitutes a civil dispute between Mr W and Person A, and Halifax had no obligation to intervene before processing the authorised payment.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that while Mr W may have been the victim of fraud, the payment does not meet the CRM Code definition of an APP scam. The CRM Code requires that payment was made to another person for what the customer believed were legitimate purposes but which were in fact fraudulent. The evidence does not demonstrate that Person A did not intend to use the funds as agreed at the time of payment. The case is a civil dispute between Mr W and Person A rather than an APP scam. Halifax had no obligation to intervene prior to releasing funds as there was no evidence of an APP scam meeting the CRM Code definition.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website