Not upheld: Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr R complained that Revolut failed to refund money he lost to a cryptocurrency investment scam. Mr R made multiple payments from his Revolut account to what he believed was a genuine investment opportunity, including high-value payments of £9,000 and £8,989 on 19 June 2025. Revolut provided tailored warnings and conducted phone interventions, but Mr R provided misleading responses and proceeded with the payments. The ombudsman found that while Revolut should have intervened on the high-value payments, the evidence showed Mr R would likely have proceeded regardless, given his determined behaviour, use of multiple banking providers to circumvent blocks, and willingness to provide inaccurate information to both Revolut and another bank. The complaint was not upheld as the ombudsman could not establish that Revolut's failure to intervene would have prevented the loss.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Revolut should have intervened on the high-value payments of £9,000 and £8,989 on 19 June 2025, the critical issue was causation. The ombudsman had to determine whether a proportionate intervention would have prevented the loss. Based on Mr R's interactions with both Revolut and L, the ombudsman found that Mr R deliberately provided misleading information to circumvent fraud protections, tested the scam platform with small amounts first, used multiple banking providers when one blocked crypto payments, and remained convinced the investment was genuine despite multiple warnings. The ombudsman concluded that even with better intervention questions, Mr R would likely have proceeded with the payments given his determined behaviour and willingness to provide inaccurate information.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website