Not upheld: scam protection and fraud prevention complaint against Monzo Bank Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr T, a victim of an investment scam, sent €29,715 to a Monzo account believing it was a legitimate investment. He later discovered the scam and complained that Monzo should have prevented the loss. The ombudsman found that while Mr T was genuinely victimized, Monzo was not responsible because: Mr T was not a Monzo customer; Monzo conducted appropriate checks and monitoring; there was no causal link between any Monzo failure and the loss; and the scammers had multiple accounts across Europe, so Mr T would likely have been directed to pay another account if the Monzo account had been unavailable. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Mr T was genuinely a victim of a scam, Monzo could not be held responsible because: (1) Mr T was not a Monzo customer and Monzo owed him no duty of care; (2) Monzo conducted appropriate checks and monitoring; (3) there was no causal link between any alleged Monzo failure and the loss; and (4) even if Monzo had closed the account, the scammers had multiple accounts across Europe and Mr T would likely have been directed to pay another account instead. The speculative nature of any recovery from other banks through law enforcement was too remote and dependent on too many external factors to establish causation.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website