Veste

Not upheld: Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Capital One (Europe) pc trading as Capital One

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6454399 of 2026-06-25T00:00:00+00:00. Fraud reimbursement (APP scams) complaint against Capital One (Europe) pc trading as Capital One. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6454399
Decision date2026-06-25T00:00:00+00:00
FirmCapital One (Europe) pc trading as Capital One
ProductCredit card
Claim typeFraud reimbursement (APP scams)
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNone. The ombudsman did not direct Capital One to do anything further.

Summary

The Estate of the late Mr Y complained to Capital One and subsequently to FOS after a fraudster used Mr Y's details to open a Capital One credit account following his death in 2021. The Estate sought compensation for Capital One's role in allowing the account to be opened and for its handling of the complaint. The ombudsman found that while the account was fraudulently opened, Capital One took appropriate steps by closing it. The ombudsman declined to award compensation for distress and inconvenience to the Estate, as FOS does not make such awards to estates of deceased complainants for events occurring after death. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while a fraudster did use the deceased's details to open the account, Capital One took the steps that would be expected in such circumstances by closing the account. The ombudsman acknowledged the Estate's arguments about compensation for distress and inconvenience but noted that FOS does not make such awards to the estates of deceased complainants, particularly where the events complained about occurred after the person had passed away. The ombudsman therefore found no basis to direct Capital One to take further action.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Capital One (Europe) pc trading as Capital One, all decisions10%
Fraud reimbursement (APP scams), all decisions20,97621%
Credit card, all decisions26,05222%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website