Not upheld: scam / authorised push payment (APP) fraud - refund claim complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss S fell victim to a job scam after being contacted via social media and was persuaded to make four card payments totalling over £2,500 from her newly opened Revolut account to her own cryptocurrency wallet, from which the funds were transferred to fraudster-controlled accounts. Revolut declined some payments and issued dynamic warnings but did not prevent the transactions. Miss S complained that Revolut should have done more to prevent the fraud. The ombudsman found the complaint not upheld because the payments fell outside the Reimbursement Rules (being card payments rather than faster payments to another person's account), Miss S had authorised the payments, the amounts were not unusual given Revolut's transaction volume, and Revolut's interventions were proportionate and reasonable.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the Reimbursement Rules do not apply because the payments were made by card to Miss S's own cryptocurrency account, not directly to another person's account. Although Miss S authorised the payments under the Payment Services Regulations 2017, the ombudsman considered whether Revolut should have intervened more robustly. The ombudsman concluded that the payment amounts were not unusual or remarkable given Revolut's transaction volume, the account was newly opened with no historical data for comparison, and Revolut's dynamic warnings were proportionate and reasonable. The ombudsman also found no viable chargeback claim as the cryptocurrency exchange provided the service as intended.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website