Not upheld: Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W, vulnerable due to mental health issues and grief, received an inheritance and was targeted by investment scammers. Between June 2023 and February 2024, he paid scammers £79,306 across multiple banks, including £31,260 through a Revolut account opened in July 2023. Although Revolut should have implemented human fraud interventions at certain high-value payments given the suspicious multistage payment pattern, the ombudsman concluded that such interventions would not have prevented the loss. Mr W's own communications showed he already suspected fraud before opening the Revolut account, deliberately misrepresented payment purposes, and continued sending money despite warnings from Revolut and other banks due to the scammers' psychological manipulation. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Revolut should have recognised heightened fraud risk at payment 4 (£7,000) due to the multistage payment pattern to multiple new payees within days of account opening, and should have implemented human intervention with probing questions and scam education. However, the ombudsman concluded that causation was not established because Mr W's own dialogue with the scammer demonstrated he already suspected fraud before opening the Revolut account, deliberately selected 'something else' as the payment reason to avoid detection, mislabelled transfers from Bank S, and consistently disregarded written warnings from both Revolut and Bank M. The scammers maintained psychological control over Mr W through false hope, causing him to continue payments despite his logical judgment telling him it was a scam. Therefore, even if Revolut had intervened, Mr W would likely have found alternative means to make the payments.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website