Partially upheld: Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Metro Bank PLC
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6272667 of 2026-07-06T00:00:00+00:00. Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Metro Bank PLC. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6272667 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-07-06T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Metro Bank PLC |
| Product | Current account |
| Claim type | Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | Metro Bank must refund £296.27 in respect of payment three (50% of £592.53 actual loss after partial return) and 50% of payments four and five, totalling £9,996.27. Metro Bank must pay interest on each amount using time-weighted average of Bank of England base rate plus one percentage point, calculated from date each payment was made to date of settlement. |
Summary
Mr R was scammed by a fake investment platform after seeing an advertisement on social media in August 2025. He made seven payments totalling approximately £41,749.48 to three different companies between August and September 2025, with the final payment made on 17 September 2025. He reported the scam to Metro Bank on 16 January 2026. Mr R complained that Metro Bank should have intervened on the large international payments from his newly opened account. The ombudsman upheld the complaint in part, finding Metro Bank should have intervened on payment three (12 September 2025) when multiple risk factors combined, but held Mr R equally responsible for missing clear warning signs. Metro Bank was directed to refund 50% of the losses from payments three, four, and five, totalling £9,996.27 plus interest.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
While APP scam reimbursement rules do not apply to international payments, Metro Bank had a broader obligation under law, regulations, and good industry practice to monitor accounts for unusual transactions and signs of fraud. By payment three (12 September 2025), multiple risk factors combined to require intervention: significant escalation in payment size, third international payment to different companies, payments routed through transfers from another account, and account drainage. The ombudsman found it likely that simple questions from Metro Bank would have uncovered the scam, particularly given Mr R had already expressed concerns about negative reviews the day before. However, Mr R bore equal responsibility due to clear warning signs he missed: discovering investment through social media advertising, conducting no independent research before investing, failing to notice payments to different companies, and accepting the suggestion to take out a loan.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Metro Bank PLC, all decisions | 1,233 | 30% |
| Fraud reimbursement (APP scams), all decisions | 21,192 | 21% |
| Current account, all decisions | 48,691 | 19% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website