Not upheld: unauthorized transaction dispute and account closure complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC trading as Barclaycard

Decision detail

Summary

Miss B complained that Barclaycard held her liable for a £180 transaction she did not authorize and subsequently closed her credit card account. Barclaycard's technical records showed Miss B's genuine card was used with her PIN correctly entered, and the ombudsman found it implausible that an unauthorized party could have obtained both the card and PIN without Miss B's knowledge, particularly given the fraudster did not attempt further transactions despite significant available credit. The ombudsman also found Barclaycard was entitled to close the account after providing proper notice and observed the account terms, with no evidence the closure was connected to the dispute claim. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Payment Services Regulations 2017 and Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 83. The key reasoning was that for an unauthorized party to have made the transaction, they would have needed to obtain Miss B's card without her noticing, use it with her PIN (known only to her), and return it undetected. The ombudsman found this implausible, particularly given that a fraudster with access to the card and significant available credit would likely attempt further transactions. The ombudsman concluded it was more likely than not that Miss B or someone with her consent authorized the transaction. Regarding account closure, the ombudsman found Barclaycard was entitled to close the account, provided proper notice was given and terms were observed, which they were. The ombudsman found no evidence connecting the closure decision to the dispute claim.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website