Not upheld: Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Tide Platform Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S, representing limited company A, invested £29,500 and £15,100 with company X through his Tide business account, receiving returns until X's director was arrested in January 2025 and the company entered liquidation. Mr S claimed Tide should have intervened to prevent the payments as an APP scam. While the ombudsman agreed Tide should have provided tailored warnings about investment scam risks, it found that Mr S's extensive prior research, receipt of legitimate returns, and X's legitimate appearance through Companies House registration and use of a regulated solicitors firm meant any intervention would not have prevented the payments. The complaint was not upheld as causation could not be established.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied a causation test, finding that while Tide should have intervened with tailored warnings about investment scams, any such intervention would not have prevented Mr S from continuing with the payments. Mr S had conducted extensive research, found positive endorsements, received legitimate returns on the first investment, and X appeared legitimate through Companies House registration and use of a regulated solicitors firm. The lack of publicly available information indicating fraud at the time of the payments meant that even a proportionate intervention by Tide would not have uncovered the scam or changed Mr S's decision to invest.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website