Not upheld: scam refund / irresponsible payment processing complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss J lost approximately £5,700 to a task-based job scam after being instructed to open a Revolut account and purchase cryptocurrency. Revolut blocked the first payment and conducted fraud prevention checks on subsequent payments, providing warnings about social media scams and pressuring tactics. However, Miss J provided inaccurate responses to Revolut's questions, following the scammer's coaching on how to respond. The ombudsman found Revolut's interventions were reasonable and proportionate, and that further intervention would likely have been ineffective given Miss J's demonstrated willingness to provide false information (as evidenced by her deceiving another bank on a related payment). The complaint was not upheld and no refund was directed.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Revolut should have suspected fraud based on the payment patterns (new account, multiple crypto payments to well-known provider in short timeframe), their fraud prevention interventions were proportionate and reasonable. Revolut provided clear warnings about scams, asked targeted questions, and warned Miss J about being coached. However, Miss J provided inaccurate answers following the scammer's instructions, preventing Revolut from knowing the true circumstances. Crucially, the ombudsman applied a causation test: even if Revolut had intervened further, Miss J would likely have provided false information anyway, as evidenced by her doing so with another bank. Therefore, Revolut could not reasonably have uncovered or prevented the scam through proportionate intervention.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website