Not upheld: disputed payment transaction / alleged fraud complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr E complained that NatWest should refund two taxi transactions totalling £571.47 made in Barcelona after he was allegedly misled by a taxi driver into repeatedly authorizing payments. The ombudsman found the transactions were authorized under the Payment Services Regulations 2017 because Mr E intentionally used his card on the payment terminal, and consent under the PSRs is not invalidated by deception about amounts. NatWest was not obligated to raise a chargeback claim without supporting evidence such as a receipt. The complaint was not upheld, though NatWest's previous offer of £100 compensation for administrative delay remains available.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Under the PSRs, authorization requires both authentication and consent. While Mr E was misled about whether payments went through, consent under the PSRs does not require 'informed consent' and is not invalidated by deception about the amount. Mr E intentionally used his card on the payment terminal, thereby providing consent. The transactions were authenticated correctly and not unusual enough to trigger NatWest's fraud systems. A chargeback claim would have had no reasonable prospect of success without supporting evidence such as a receipt.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website