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

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B disputed numerous transactions made from his HSBC account to a cryptocurrency platform in November 2022, claiming he did not authorise them. HSBC treated the transactions as authorised and refused a refund. The ombudsman examined whether the transactions met the Payment Services Regulations 2017 requirements of authentication and consent. Finding that Mr B had confirmed making at least one disputed payment in a call with HSBC, had a pattern of similar transactions to the same platform, and that technical evidence showed his device was logged in and his password-protected phone was used to confirm transactions, the ombudsman concluded the transactions were authorised. The complaint was not upheld and no refund was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Under the Payment Services Regulations 2017, both authentication and consent must be established for a payment to be authorised. The ombudsman found that the transactions were authenticated based on technical evidence showing Mr B was logged into his device and card details were used. Regarding consent, the ombudsman was persuaded that Mr B consented to the transactions because: (1) Mr B confirmed in a call close to the time of the disputed transactions that he made the £1,850 payment; (2) there was a clear pattern of similar payments to the same cryptocurrency platform in the preceding month; (3) the transactions aligned with Mr B's stated use of the account; (4) Mr B had to confirm transactions in his password-protected banking app; and (5) there was no compelling evidence of card or device compromise. The ombudsman concluded it was more likely than not that Mr B consented to the transactions, either by making them himself or authorising someone else to do so.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website