Not upheld: disputed transactions / unauthorised payments claim complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr W complained that Barclays failed to refund approximately £750 in payments made by his child using a tablet device he had gifted, which was logged into his app store account with his pre-loaded and authenticated card details. The payments occurred weekly from December 2023 to October 2025 without Mr W's knowledge. The ombudsman found the payments were authorised under the concept of apparent authority, as Mr W had given his child the ability to make payments on his behalf and did not revoke this ability until after discovering the spending. The ombudsman concluded Barclays was not at fault and that Mr W is liable for the spending, noting that Barclays and the app store had already refunded all payments within the chargeback time window.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the concept of 'apparent authority' to find that Mr W gave his child the ability to make payments on his behalf by providing a device with pre-loaded, authenticated card details. Since Mr W did not revoke this ability until after the disputed payments, he is liable for the spending. The payments were not unauthorised under the relevant rules as they were made using the agreed method with apparent authority. Barclays had no good reason to intervene as the payments appeared legitimate. A chargeback was unlikely to succeed as the payments were authorised and the merchant provided the services paid for.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website