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

Decision detail

Summary

Miss K lost £1,031.43 to a scam involving a fraudulent overseas clothing supplier in February 2026 and requested a refund from Revolut in April 2026. Revolut declined to refund the payment. The ombudsman found that while Miss K authorised the payment and was presumed liable under the Payment Services Regulations 2017, Revolut was not required to refund because the payment amount was consistent with her typical account usage, the international destination alone was not suspicious, and Revolut provided an appropriate new beneficiary warning. The ombudsman also noted that recovery was unlikely given the time delay between the payment and reporting. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the legal principle that customers are presumed liable for authorised payments under the Payment Services Regulations 2017. However, payment service providers should intervene in some circumstances where transactions appear suspicious. The ombudsman found the £1,031.43 payment was not unusually excessive and was in line with Miss K's typical account usage (she had made a £1,000 transaction days before). The international destination alone was insufficient to trigger suspicion. Revolut provided an appropriate proportionate warning. The time delay between payment (February) and reporting (April) meant recovery was unlikely given scammers typically move funds quickly.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website