Not upheld: scam - refusal to reimburse complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss C lost £520 to a scam in February 2026 when she believed she was purchasing tournament tickets from what appeared to be a legitimate merchant. Revolut declined her scam claim and the complaint was brought to the FOS. The ombudsman found that Miss C had authorised the payment and it was not sufficiently unusual or suspicious to warrant Revolut's intervention, as it was modest in value, similar to previous transactions, and made to an apparently legitimate company. The ombudsman also found that the payment could not be stopped once made and a chargeback would not have succeeded. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The payment was authorised by Miss C and therefore she is presumed liable in the first instance. The payment was not unusual or suspicious - it was modest in value, similar to previous transactions, made to an apparently legitimate merchant, and represented a single payment rather than multiple large payments. While Revolut should monitor for fraud risks, the balance must be struck between identifying fraudulent payments and minimising disruption to legitimate transactions. The payment did not present sufficient red flags to warrant intervention. The payment could not be stopped once made as it was an authorised debit card transaction, and a chargeback would not have succeeded as the merchant appeared legitimate.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website