Not upheld: scam prevention and fraud protection complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B and Mr C complained that Barclays should refund £51,340 lost to a cryptocurrency investment scam orchestrated via social media. Mr C was directed to a fraudulent investment website and made 29 payments between February and December 2021, believing he was making legitimate investments. When attempting to withdraw funds, he was asked for additional payments before the website was taken down. The ombudsman found that while Barclays should have issued a general written warning on the large June 2021 payment, the complainants' other account provider had already intervened multiple times with warnings and calls without preventing the scam. Since Mr C presented himself as an experienced investor and was not dissuaded by existing warnings, the ombudsman concluded that further intervention by Barclays would not have prevented the loss and therefore did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Although Mr C authorised the payments on the scammer's instruction, banks have a duty to protect against fraud. The ombudsman found that Barclays should have intervened with a general written warning when the large payment of £5,000 was made on 21 June 2021. However, the ombudsman noted that Mr C's other account provider had already intervened multiple times with warnings and calls, yet these did not prevent the scam from continuing. Mr C consistently presented himself as an experienced investor and was not dissuaded by warnings. Therefore, the ombudsman concluded that earlier or further intervention by Barclays would not have been more impactful and would not have prevented the scam.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website