Not upheld: Card / payment disputes complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W complained that Revolut acted unfairly by not refunding a payment made with his debit card for car rental services abroad. Mr W disputed additional insurance and fuel prepayment charges, claiming he was pressured and misled into purchasing them. Revolut attempted a chargeback under the 'merchandise or services not received' code, but the merchant defended the claim with evidence including a signed invoice, receipt, and PIN authorisation. Revolut declined to pursue the matter to arbitration. The ombudsman found that Revolut acted fairly because the merchant's evidence would have made it unlikely to succeed under either the original or alternative chargeback reason codes, and card issuers are not obligated to pursue claims without reasonable prospect of success.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman considered whether Revolut acted fairly in not pursuing the chargeback to arbitration. While acknowledging the chargeback code used may not have been the most appropriate, the ombudsman concluded that the merchant's evidence (receipt, invoice, PIN authorisation, and evidence of service utilisation) would have made it difficult for Revolut to succeed under either the original or alternative reason codes. The ombudsman noted that chargebacks are not guaranteed to succeed and that a card issuer is not required to pursue a claim if there is no reasonable prospect of success. The ombudsman could only assess Revolut's handling of the financial service (the chargeback process), not the merchant's conduct in the underlying transaction.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website