Partially upheld: scam - failure to intervene and provide fraud warnings complaint against Santander UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr L was victim of a romance scam in April 2025, making two payments totalling £12,201.99 to an account in his own name with a third party, believing he was in a genuine relationship and would receive a share of inherited gold bullion. The second payment of £9,001.99 was significantly larger than his usual account activity and followed a substantial loan credit. Santander failed to intervene or ask questions about the payment's purpose despite these risk indicators. The ombudsman found that had Santander conducted appropriate intervention with tailored questioning, the scam would likely have been uncovered. However, Mr L also failed to take reasonable precautions by sending large sums to someone he had met online weeks earlier and never in person. The complaint was partially upheld, requiring Santander to refund 50% of the second payment plus interest.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

While Mr L was authorised to make the payments and is legally responsible, Santander had a duty to conduct fraud checks and should have intervened on the second payment. The payment was significantly larger than usual activity and followed a substantial loan credit, presenting sufficient scam risk indicators. Santander failed to conduct meaningful intervention or ask questions about the payment's purpose. Had it done so with tailored questioning and warnings, the scam would likely have been uncovered given the suspicious nature of the underlying explanation. However, Mr L also contributed to his loss by not taking reasonable precautions, as he was sending large sums to someone he had met online weeks earlier and never in person, and there were inconsistencies in the story. Therefore, responsibility should be shared equally for the second payment only.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website