Not upheld: scam reimbursement - romance fraud complaint against Western Union Payment Services GB Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs C lost £5,000 to a romance scam after meeting a fraudster on a dating website who convinced her to send money for shipping a briefcase of watches. Western Union intervened on the payment and asked Mrs C about its purpose, but she misled them by stating it was for moving services. Western Union refused to reimburse the loss, citing Mrs C's misleading statement and a signed waiver. The ombudsman upheld Western Union's position, finding that Mrs C's false answers did not reasonably alert the firm to potential fraud, and that Western Union was not aware of Mrs C's vulnerabilities (recent loss of husband, relocation) that might have warranted additional protective measures.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

While Mrs C authorised the payment and is ordinarily responsible for authorised transactions, the ombudsman considered whether Western Union did enough to protect her from fraud. Western Union did intervene and ask questions, but Mrs C's answers about the payment being for moving services did not reasonably raise concerns about financial harm. The ombudsman found that Mrs C was deliberately providing misleading information to ensure the payment processed, and that Western Union could not have meaningfully revealed the scam based on her answers. Additionally, Western Union was not aware of Mrs C's specific vulnerabilities prior to the payment, so they were not required to adapt their services accordingly.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website