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

Decision detail

Summary

Ms W lost over £200,000 to a romance scam conducted over five months, during which she was manipulated into sending funds via her Revolut account to cryptocurrency providers. The scammer coached Ms W on how to deceive Revolut's fraud checks, and she falsely told Revolut she was investing inherited money. Although Revolut intervened twice and the ombudsman found it should have intervened again in May 2025 when activity spiked, the ombudsman concluded that proportionate checks would not have uncovered the scam given Ms W's coached responses and the scammer's detailed guidance on evading controls. The complaint was not upheld as the payments were not covered by fraud refund schemes and Revolut could not reasonably have prevented the loss.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the legal framework that EMIs must process authorized payments but should monitor for fraud risks and intervene proportionately when unusual activity is detected. While Revolut should have intervened again in May 2025 given the spike in activity, the ombudsman concluded that proportionate checks would not have uncovered the scam because: (1) Ms W had been thoroughly coached by the scammer with a plausible cover story involving inheritance and investment; (2) the scammer had discussed in detail how to evade fraud controls; (3) Ms W would likely have maintained her false story even under further questioning; and (4) even if Revolut had blocked further transactions, Ms W would have found alternative payment methods given her state of manipulation. The ombudsman found no fraud refund scheme applied as payments went to accounts in Ms W's own name.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website