Not upheld: scam - safe account fraud complaint against Starling Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs J fell victim to a safe account scam in December 2025 when a scammer posing as a Starling employee convinced her to authorise six payments totalling £9,115.99. Starling refunded £7,916.99 but refused to refund the first £1,199 payment. The ombudsman found that while Mrs J was manipulated, she authorised the payment and it was not unusual enough to warrant additional checks by Starling given its value, the merchant type, and her previous transaction history. The ombudsman concluded that Starling acted reasonably in processing the payment and could not have recovered it through chargeback, therefore the complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Mrs J was manipulated by the scammer, she authorised the £1,199 payment and is presumed liable in the first instance. The payment was not covered by the PSR's mandatory reimbursement scheme as it was a debit card transaction. The ombudsman considered whether Starling should have carried out additional checks before processing the payment. The £1,199 payment to a well-known retailer was not unusual enough to warrant additional checks given: (1) it was a relatively low value payment; (2) Mrs J had previously made payments of several thousand pounds; (3) it is common for customers to make payments to different payees; and (4) the merchant did not carry increased fraud risk. Therefore, Starling acted reasonably in processing the payment. Regarding recovery, a chargeback against the retailer would have had no reasonable prospects of success as the retailer would have been able to defend it.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website