Not upheld: chargeback dispute complaint against Starling Bank Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B booked return flights through online travel agent X for approximately £1,650 on 24 April 2025, believing they were direct flights. He later discovered the flights involved an eight-hour stopover and requested a chargeback from Starling Bank. Starling declined, stating Mr B had approved the transaction and was responsible for reviewing booking details. Mr B provided an itinerary quote from a different travel agent Y as evidence but this did not demonstrate that X had misrepresented the flights. The ombudsman upheld Starling's decision, finding that under Mastercard chargeback rules, there was insufficient evidence that X had described the flights as direct or misrepresented them, and therefore no grounds for a successful chargeback existed.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied Mastercard's chargeback rules which require evidence that goods or services did not conform to their description. Mr B provided no evidence that X had described the flights as direct or misrepresented them. The itinerary from Y was irrelevant as it came from a different company and did not show what X had told Mr B. There was no evidence of misrepresentation by X, no evidence Mr B was entitled to cancel or change the flights, and no grounds for a successful chargeback. Starling was not obliged to attempt a chargeback and acted reasonably in declining to do so.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website