Not upheld: disputed transaction / refund request / chargeback handling complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest)

Decision detail

Summary

Miss C, director of company G, paid £600 to firm S for business coaching services via debit card on 27 November 2025. When she requested a refund a week later, S refused, claiming it was a non-refundable holding fee, though no written terms or cancellation policy had been provided. Miss C complained to NatWest, arguing the non-refundable term was never disclosed or agreed and that the full cost (£6,000 including VAT) had not been disclosed upfront. NatWest declined to refund or pursue a chargeback. The ombudsman upheld NatWest's decision, finding that the absence of written documentation meant any chargeback would likely fail, as it would be impossible to establish what was agreed between the parties at the time of payment.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Miss C authorised the payment, the key issue was whether NatWest acted fairly in declining to recover the funds post-dispute. The only recovery option would have been a chargeback, but the absence of written documentation meant S could successfully defend against such a claim, as it would be impossible to establish with certainty what was discussed or agreed at the time of payment. The ombudsman noted that the payment amount was relatively low and consistent with G's prior account usage, so no additional fraud prevention checks were required before processing.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website