Partially upheld: fraud and scams - ineffective fraud prevention intervention complaint against Santander UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Ms C paid £899 to a scammer via an international payment company (Company T) believing she was booking a flight with a well-known airline. Santander's fraud prevention system initially blocked the payment, but when Ms C called to release it, the agent (who worked in fraud and security) did not ask probing questions despite suspicious indicators: paying an overseas company for a UK airline ticket. The ombudsman found Santander failed its fraud prevention duties under PSR and Consumer Duty, but also found Ms C contributed to the loss by not recognising red flags. The complaint was partially upheld, ordering Santander to refund 50% of the loss (£449.50).

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that although Ms C authorised the payment, Santander had a duty under PSR and Consumer Duty to protect customers from foreseeable fraud. The fraud prevention system had already flagged the transaction, and the agent should have been alert to red flags: paying an overseas company via an international payment company for a UK airline ticket is unusual and suspicious. A skilled fraud agent should have asked probing questions about how Ms C found the airline, due diligence on the payee, and why she couldn't pay directly. If the agent had been alert and actively listening, the scam would likely have been uncovered. However, Ms C also bore some responsibility for not recognising red flags (two payment blocks, paying an unknown company internationally) and not conducting due diligence. Therefore, liability was fairly split 50/50.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website