Not upheld: scam reimbursement - failure to prevent fraudulent payment complaint against Western Union Payment Services GB Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs S fell victim to an impersonation scam in February 2026 where she was deceived into sending £2,386.63 via Western Union under the pretence of helping her husband's nephew who was allegedly detained. She discovered the scam when a second payment was requested. Mrs S complained that Western Union should have prevented the payment, but the ombudsman found the single payment was not unusual enough to trigger fraud detection, appropriate warnings were provided, and the firm lacked the ongoing account monitoring capabilities of traditional banks. The complaint was not upheld and no refund was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman balanced the firm's obligation to process payments against identifying fraudulent transactions. The single payment amount, while significant to Mrs S, was not unusual enough to trigger heightened scam risk concerns. Western Union provided proportionate warnings about scam risks and the irreversibility of international payments. Unlike banks with ongoing account monitoring relationships, payment service providers have limited historic usage data to detect fraud. The funds were promptly moved by scammers, making recovery unlikely. Western Union pursued recovery on a best endeavours basis and did not unreasonably delay in responding to Mrs S's concerns.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website