Partially upheld: scam - failure to intervene and prevent fraud complaint against Kroo Bank Ltd
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6356897 of 2026-05-14T00:00:00+00:00. scam - failure to intervene and prevent fraud complaint against Kroo Bank Ltd. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6356897 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-14T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Kroo Bank Ltd |
| Product | current account |
| Claim type | scam - failure to intervene and prevent fraud |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | Kroo Bank Ltd must pay: (1) 50% of the £21,000 payment made on 16 July 2024 (£10,500); (2) 50% of the faster payments totalling £22,100 made between 26 July 2024 and 12 September 2024 (£11,050); (3) 8% simple interest per year on the reimbursed amounts, calculated from the date each payment was made until settlement, minus applicable tax |
Summary
Mr B, a victim of prior cryptocurrency and recovery scams, opened a Kroo account in June 2024 and made payments totalling £28,400 between June and July 2024 to purchase cryptocurrency as part of a recovery scam. Kroo questioned Mr B about his cryptocurrency purchases and warned him such activity could lead to account restrictions, but failed to intervene when Mr B made a £21,000 payment on 16 July 2024 representing a significant increase in transaction size. Mr B subsequently made additional faster payments totalling £22,100 to a cryptocurrency provider. The ombudsman upheld the complaint in part, finding Kroo should have intervened more thoroughly on the £21,000 payment and rejected the faster payments in line with its stated policy, but reduced the reimbursement to 50% due to Mr B's contributory negligence in proceeding with payments despite warning signs he should have recognised given his prior scam experience.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that while Mr B is presumed liable for authorised payments under the Payment Services Regulations, Kroo failed to intervene sufficiently when Mr B made the £21,000 payment on 16 July 2024. This payment represented a significant increase in size and was the fourth cryptocurrency-related payment within 2-3 weeks. Kroo had already questioned Mr B about his cryptocurrency purchases and warned him that such activity could lead to account restrictions. The ombudsman concluded that had Kroo asked further open-ended questions about this large payment, it would likely have identified the scam, as Mr B would have been honest about purchasing cryptocurrency he was then sending to fraudsters and having no access to his funds. However, the ombudsman found Mr B bore some responsibility for the loss because certain elements of the scam should have caused him concern (being asked to provide collateral due to his age, continued payments, failure to verify the fraudster's claims), particularly given his prior scam victimisation. The ombudsman applied a 50% contributory negligence reduction. For the faster payments made after 26 July 2024, Kroo had explicitly told Mr B it would reject payments to crypto providers, yet the payments to CB (identifiably crypto-related) were processed, warranting the same 50% reimbursement.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Kroo Bank Ltd, all decisions | 141 | 51% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website