Not upheld: disputed transaction and refund claim based on vulnerability and change of mind complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs M disputed a £5,000 payment for a business mentoring event, claiming she was extremely vulnerable at the time and unable to make a sound decision. After the merchant agreed to refund £2,500 through mediation, she sought the remaining £2,500 from Barclays, arguing the bank should have protected her as a vulnerable consumer. The ombudsman found the transaction was properly authorised using genuine chip and PIN technology, with no evidence of merchant breach or misrepresentation. Although Mrs M claimed vulnerability, Barclays had no knowledge of vulnerabilities preventing her from managing her finances, and the payment was not sufficiently out of character to warrant intervention. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found the transaction was authorised as Mrs M's genuine card and chip were used with no evidence of unauthorised use. No breach of contract or misrepresentation by the merchant was demonstrated. The 14-day cooling off period did not apply as the payment was made in person. While Mrs M claimed vulnerability, Barclays had no knowledge of vulnerabilities preventing her from managing her own finances. The payment, though larger than usual, was not sufficiently out of character or suspicious to warrant intervention. Even if Barclays should have contacted her, she had agreed to the payment at the time and there was no evidence of merchant fraud that would have changed her decision.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website