Partially upheld: inadequate fraud prevention and failure to intervene on suspicious payments complaint against Bank of Scotland plc trading as Halifax

Decision detail

Summary

Mr R lost £13,800 to an investment scam in 2025 after making multiple cryptocurrency payments via open banking through his Halifax account. The ombudsman found that Halifax should have intervened at the second payment of £1,800, which brought the day's total cryptocurrency transfers to £3,800 and was uncharacteristic in nature. Although Halifax argued it had limited opportunity to intervene on open banking payments, the ombudsman disagreed, finding Halifax retained a duty to protect customers from fraud risk. The complaint was partially upheld, with Halifax ordered to pay £11,800 plus interest, representing losses from payment two onwards.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Halifax ought to have intervened at the second payment as it was uncharacteristic in size and nature. Although the payments were made via open banking, this does not remove Halifax's duty to protect customers from fraud risk. The ombudsman disagreed with Halifax's characterization of the payment as a 'pull payment', finding it was a push payment. A tailored written warning at that point would likely have made a material difference to Mr R's losses. While Mr R provided inaccurate information to obtain loans, this is distinguishable from misleading his bank about the purpose of the specific payment, and he was not specifically asked to mislead Halifax.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website