Not upheld: Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr V complained that Revolut unfairly refused to refund £2,766.12 that he transferred while travelling overseas, claiming he was threatened with violence and forced to make the payment to criminals. The payment was made from his Revolut account to another bank account he controlled, and then to an account he did not control. Revolut declined to refund, arguing the payment was authorised by Mr V, was sent to a previously-used account, was not covered by APP scam rules, and was not sufficiently suspicious to warrant intervention. The ombudsman found the payment was authorised under the Payment Services Regulations 2017 as Mr V used his correct credentials and followed the agreed procedure, the transaction was not unusually suspicious, and the APP scam rules do not apply to inter-account transfers or international payments. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Payment Services Regulations 2017, which define an authorised transaction as one where the payer has given consent in accordance with the agreed procedure. Mr V used his correct credentials and followed the agreed procedure, therefore the payment was authorised despite being made under duress. The ombudsman found the transaction was not sufficiently unusual or out of character to warrant intervention by Revolut, as it was not particularly large, was to a previously-used account, and did not form part of a suspicious pattern. The APP scam reimbursement rules do not apply as they exclude payments between accounts controlled by the same customer and international payments. The ombudsman also found Revolut's request for bank statements as evidence was reasonable and Mr V's inability to provide them weakened his claim.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website