Not upheld: disputed transactions / unauthorised payments complaint against Monzo Bank Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr O disputed a £894 payment made from his Monzo account on 21 December 2025, claiming it was fraudulent and made without his knowledge or authorisation. Monzo refused to refund the transaction, stating it had been made using Mr O's registered device with correct security credentials and found no evidence of account compromise. The ombudsman upheld Monzo's decision, finding that the technical evidence showed the payment was made using Mr O's registered phone which he stated he had in his possession, using his correct security details (password and biometrics), making it more likely than not that Mr O authorised the payment. The ombudsman rejected Mr O's theories of sophisticated fraud or insider involvement as implausible given the practical circumstances. Monzo was ordered to pay £20 compensation for delayed response timescales.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Payment Services Regulations 2017, which require consideration of whether the transaction was technically correctly authenticated (which it was) and whether it is more likely than not that Mr O authorised the payment. The technical evidence showed the payment was made using Mr O's registered device which he stated he had in his possession, using his correct security credentials (password and biometrics). There was no evidence of account compromise, unauthorised device registration, or account takeover. While sophisticated fraud is theoretically possible, the practical circumstances (incomplete second transaction, account not emptied) made this implausible. The ombudsman rejected the suggestion of an insider job as Mr O would have needed to provide his biometric data to a Monzo employee, which contradicted his claim to have had his phone throughout.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website