Not upheld: Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Deel Payments UK Ltd (trading as Atlantic Money)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr P lost money to a fraudulent investment scheme after opening a Deel account to facilitate payments to the fraudsters between September and November 2025. He complained that Deel should have reimbursed his losses, arguing the firm should have identified the suspicious transactions and intervened. The ombudsman found that while Deel should generally be alert to fraud risks, it was not unreasonable for Deel to process the payments given its function as an international money transfer provider, the lack of prior account history, and the spread-out payment pattern. The ombudsman further concluded that even if Deel had intervened, it would likely have been unsuccessful in preventing the payments because Mr P deliberately concealed the true purpose and demonstrated willingness to use alternative payment methods when blocked.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

While Deel should reasonably have been alert to transactions indicating fraud risk and intervene where appropriate, the ombudsman found it was not unreasonable for Deel to process the payments without intervention given: (1) Deel's function as an international money transfer provider rather than a traditional bank; (2) the absence of prior account activity to establish suspicious patterns; (3) payments spread over weeks rather than in quick succession; and (4) the complexity of balancing fraud detection against unduly delaying legitimate payments. Additionally, even if Deel had intervened, the ombudsman found it unlikely such intervention would have prevented the payments because Mr P was deliberately concealing the true purpose, had placed his trust with the fraudsters rather than payment providers, and had demonstrated willingness to use alternative payment methods when blocked.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website