Not upheld: scam reimbursement claim complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W paid a £500 deposit for a motorhome but was unable to secure finance for the remaining balance. When the seller refused to refund the deposit, Mr W reported the payment to Revolut as a scam. Revolut rejected the claim as a civil dispute. The ombudsman upheld Revolut's decision, finding that both Mr W and the seller intended the payment to be for the motorhome purchase, and the dispute over the non-refundable deposit was a private civil matter between consumer and seller, not an APP scam as defined by the Payment Systems Regulator's Reimbursement Rules.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Payment Systems Regulator's Reimbursement Rules, which define APP scams as situations where a fraudster deceives a consumer into transferring funds where either the recipient is not who the consumer intended to pay or the payment is not for the intended purpose. The ombudsman found that both Mr W and the seller intended the payment to be for the purchase of a motorhome. Although Mr W could not secure finance and the seller refused to refund the deposit, there was no evidence the seller never intended to complete the sale or misrepresented the agreement. The ombudsman concluded this was a private civil dispute between consumer and seller, not a scam involving fraud or dishonesty, and therefore fell outside the scope of the Reimbursement Rules.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website