Not upheld: fraud claim refusal - insufficient evidence of scam complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B transferred £60,000 to his parent at a NatWest branch in June 2023, believing it would be invested for him. The parent instead used the money for themselves and others, then refused to return it and evicted Mr B. Mr B asked NatWest to raise a fraud claim and recover the funds, but NatWest declined, stating the payment was voluntary and the matter was a civil dispute. The ombudsman upheld NatWest's position, finding insufficient evidence of fraud or scam as Mr B could not prove a formal investment agreement or that his parent acted dishonestly with false representation. Without meeting the legal threshold for fraud, NatWest was entitled to process the authorised payment.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found a lack of evidence meeting the high legal threshold for fraud. Specifically, Mr B could not provide evidence of a formal agreement with his parent to invest and return the money, nor evidence that his parent acted dishonestly with false representation to obtain the funds. The ombudsman noted the parent may have changed their mind after receiving the money. Without sufficient evidence of fraud or scam, NatWest's primary obligation was to process the authorised payment, not to protect against financial harm from fraud.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website