Not upheld: scam reimbursement / Authorised Push Payment (APP) scam claim complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss I paid a travel agent £3,392 in two instalments for return flight tickets. When the originally requested flights became unavailable and the offered alternatives did not suit her annual leave dates, she requested a refund which was not provided. Miss I claimed this was a scam and sought reimbursement from Revolut. The ombudsman found that while Miss I was dissatisfied with the service, the evidence indicated a civil dispute between Miss I and a legitimate travel agent rather than an APP scam involving criminal deception, and therefore Revolut was not liable for reimbursement under the applicable payment services rules.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the legal definition of an APP scam under the FPS and CHAPS reimbursement rules, which requires evidence of criminal deception. The ombudsman found that while Miss I was dissatisfied with the service, the evidence did not suggest the travel agent set out to defraud her from the outset. Key factors included: the travel agent's continued engagement after the scam claim, the return of accidentally sent funds, the legitimate company registration and online presence, and bank account activity consistent with legitimate operations. The ombudsman concluded it was more likely that the original flights became unavailable and a disagreement ensued, constituting a civil dispute rather than a scam.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website