Upheld: scam reimbursement under CRM Code complaint against NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6341390 of 2026-05-07T00:00:00+00:00. scam reimbursement under CRM Code complaint against NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6341390 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-07T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY |
| Product | loan |
| Claim type | scam reimbursement under CRM Code |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Reimburse Mr B's losses in full (deducting the loan which NatWest has written off and amounts already reimbursed). Pay 8% simple interest from the date NatWest declined to reimburse him under the CRM Code to the date of settlement. |
Summary
Mr B fell victim to a fraudulent investment scam between May and June 2024, initially investing his savings and then taking out loans including one with NatWest to fund the scheme. He sent funds to a UK-based currency exchange account believing it was linked to a legitimate investment platform endorsed by a public figure. When he could not withdraw funds, he realised the scam and reported it to NatWest, which reimbursed only the first two payments funded by savings. The ombudsman found that Mr B was vulnerable to the scam due to stage four cancer treatment causing significant cognitive impairment, and that the CRM Code applied to the payments. Under the CRM Code, vulnerability prevents exceptions to reimbursement, so the ombudsman upheld the complaint and required NatWest to reimburse Mr B's remaining losses in full plus 8% simple interest.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that the CRM Code applied because the payments were push payments to a UK-based GBP-denominated account, despite the account being held by a legitimate currency exchange business that may have subsequently transferred funds abroad. The account acted as a conduit to the fraud controlled by the scammers, not as an independent beneficiary. Critically, Mr B was vulnerable to the scam as defined by the CRM Code because his stage four cancer treatment caused cognitive impairment that prevented him from protecting himself against the particular scam and to the extent of impact suffered. The scammers exploited this vulnerability by increasing pressure during treatment periods and coaching him on false statements. Under the CRM Code, where a customer is vulnerable, exceptions to reimbursement do not apply and full reimbursement is required. Whether NatWest was aware of the vulnerability or whether intervention could have prevented the loss was irrelevant to the CRM Code analysis.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY, all decisions | 1,179 | 14% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website