Not upheld: scam / fraud - refund claim complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H complained that Revolut failed to prevent him losing money to an investment scam after he sent multiple payments to what he believed was a legitimate investment. Revolut intervened several times using automated questioning, but Mr H consistently claimed he was paying a family member or friend. Although the ombudsman found Revolut should have escalated to human intervention around the fourth payment, it concluded this would not have stopped the loss because Mr H would have provided false information (as he did with another bank) or used alternative payment methods. The complaint was not upheld and no compensation was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

While Revolut should generally take proactive steps to prevent fraudulent transactions, it did intervene multiple times on Mr H's payments. The ombudsman found that although human intervention may have been appropriate around the fourth payment, it would not have prevented the loss because Mr H consistently provided false information and would likely have sought advice from the scammers on how to respond to questioning. Additionally, even if Revolut had prevented further payments, Mr H would likely have used alternative payment methods.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website