Not upheld: disputed transaction / unauthorised payment / fraud claim complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company

Decision detail

Summary

Miss B complained that NatWest declined to refund £5,488.72 after she fell victim to a bank-impersonation scam in March 2026. She claimed a fraudster posing as NatWest staff obtained her debit card and PIN, then made an unauthorised withdrawal. NatWest declined the refund, citing inconsistencies and the unusual transaction pattern. The ombudsman upheld NatWest's decision, finding the claim lacked corroborating evidence, the transaction pattern was atypical of fraudster behaviour, and it was implausible that an unauthorised party would have obtained her new PIN. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found several factors that undermined Miss B's account: (1) complete absence of corroborating evidence such as telephone records, postal company details, or receipts; (2) the unusual transaction pattern of checking balance at 1:49pm but waiting until 5:29pm to withdraw funds, which is inconsistent with typical fraudster behaviour who would act quickly to avoid detection; (3) the implausibility that an unauthorised third party would have knowledge of Miss B's new PIN issued in December 2025, given Miss B's clear assertion she did not disclose it in March 2026; and (4) Miss B's failure to attempt to access her benefits payment and work income despite claiming to rely on it to support her children, despite believing her cards were being secured for protection. The ombudsman concluded that the overall circumstances did not support a genuine unauthorised loss.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website