Not upheld: scam / fraud - failure to prevent or intervene complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr J complained that Revolut failed to prevent him from losing over £1,000 in a cryptocurrency investment scam across three transactions in January 2026. He believed Revolut should have stopped the payments. The ombudsman found that the transactions were not sufficiently unusual or out of character to trigger Revolut's fraud monitoring systems, particularly given the account's limited prior payment history and its primary use for cryptocurrency purchases. Although Revolut provided a tailored warning on the third payment, the ombudsman concluded this exceeded what was required and would likely not have prevented the scam given Mr J's prior experience with similar fraud. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman concluded that the transactions were not sufficiently unusual or out of character to trigger Revolut's fraud monitoring systems. Given the account's limited prior payment history and its primary use for cryptocurrency purchases, the scam transactions appeared normal. Although Revolut provided a warning on the third payment, this exceeded what was required, and the warning did not prevent the scam. The ombudsman noted that even if intervention was required, the warning would likely not have stopped Mr J given his prior experience with a similar scam.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website