Partially upheld: scam reimbursement and contributory negligence complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr K lost approximately £15,000 to a task-based job scam between January and February 2025, making 16 payments via Revolut. The ombudsman found that Revolut should have intervened on the 16th payment (3 February 2025) when multiple similar-value payments were made in quick succession. However, the ombudsman held Mr K 50% liable for the losses from payment 16 onwards due to contributory negligence, finding that numerous red flags (unexpected WhatsApp contact, no employment contract, requests to provide false reviews, encouragement to mislead banks, unrealistic earnings promises) should have raised his suspicions, and that he ignored Revolut's warnings. The ombudsman rejected Mr K's claim that his injury and medication impaired his judgment due to lack of supporting evidence. Revolut was ordered to reimburse 50% of losses from payment 16 onwards (£7,049.15) plus interest.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Revolut should have intervened on payment 16 due to the pattern of multiple similar-value payments in quick succession, which are common scam indicators. However, the ombudsman held Mr K 50% liable for contributory negligence because multiple red flags were present from the outset (unexpected WhatsApp contact, no employment contract, requests to provide false reviews, encouragement to mislead banks, unrealistic earnings promises, requirement to make payments to earn money) and Mr K ignored Revolut's warnings. The ombudsman found insufficient evidence that Mr K's injury and medication impaired his ability to identify these warning signs, and concluded that independent research would likely have revealed the scam.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website