Not upheld: authorised push payment scam reimbursement complaint against Nationwide Building Society
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6398894 of 2026-06-11T00:00:00+00:00. authorised push payment scam reimbursement complaint against Nationwide Building Society. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6398894 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-11T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Nationwide Building Society |
| Product | Current account |
| Claim type | authorised push payment scam reimbursement |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | None. The complaint was not upheld. |
Summary
Mr M reported falling victim to a scam after making two payments totalling £360 to what he believed was an event ticket seller, but which turned out to be fraudulent. Nationwide declined to reimburse him, and Mr M complained to the FOS. The ombudsman found that while Mr M had authorised the payments, the Faster Payments Scheme Reimbursement Rules do not apply to international transactions, and Nationwide had no reasonable grounds to suspect fraud based on the transaction characteristics. The complaint was not upheld.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied the legal framework for payment service providers, noting that Mr M was initially liable as the payments were authorised. The Faster Payments Scheme Reimbursement Rules do not apply to international transactions, and the CRM Code ceased to operate and also did not extend to such payments. While firms should monitor for suspicious activity and intervene where appropriate, the ombudsman found that these particular payments—being of low value and consistent with prior activity—did not present sufficient grounds for Nationwide to suspect fraud or intervene. The ombudsman balanced the need for fraud protection against the impracticality of intervening in every low-value transaction.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Nationwide Building Society, all decisions | 13,232 | 21% |
| Current account, all decisions | 45,590 | 19% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website