Not upheld: fraud - purchase scam/unauthorised payment recovery complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs S lost £3,678 to a sophisticated purchase scam involving a cloned website in November 2025. She made three debit card payments believing she was paying Company A but the money went to Company B. Barclays recovered £1,521 from Company B but declined to refund the first payment of £2,157 and did not pursue a chargeback. The ombudsman found that Barclays acted fairly by intervening with a telephone call when the third payment was made, and that Mrs S did not disclose the inconsistency with Company A during that call. The bank was also not obliged to pursue a chargeback as it would have been unsuccessful under the scheme rules. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Barclays had a duty to identify fraud risks and intervene where appropriate, the bank was not obliged to question the legitimacy of the payments based on the information available to it. Although the third payment in quick succession heightened fraud risk and prompted intervention, during the telephone call Mrs S confirmed she had authorised the payment to Company B and did not mention the inconsistency with Company A. The bank agent was therefore entitled to believe the payment was legitimate. A generic fraud warning would likely not have prevented the loss given the sophisticated nature of the scam. Regarding recovery, Barclays was not obliged to pursue a chargeback as it would not have been successful under the scheme rules, since Mrs S had paid a legitimate merchant that provided services, albeit not to her.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website