Monzo Bank Ltd · DRN-6181115

The complaint Mr S has complained that Monzo Bank Ltd won’t refund the money he lost after falling victim to a scam. What happened In summary, in late 2025 Mr S was contacted by a scammer offering a fake cryptocurrency investment opportunity. To fund the fake investment, Mr S made card payments from his Monzo account to his wallet at a cryptocurrency exchange. Then he bought crypto and sent it on to the scammer. In total, Mr S sent around £1,800. In the end, the scammer didn’t let Mr S withdraw, and demanded further money to unlock his funds. Mr S realised he’d been scammed, and reported the matter to Monzo. Monzo didn’t think they were liable for Mr S’s loss. They did pay him £50 compensation for some customer service issues in handling his complaint. Our investigator looked into things independently and didn’t uphold the complaint. Mr S asked for an ombudsman’s final decision, so the complaint’s been passed to me to decide. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. I understand that Mr S fell victim to a scam, for which he has my sympathy. I appreciate this cannot have been an easy matter for him to face, and I appreciate why he would like his money back. We must keep in mind that it’s the scammer who’s primarily responsible for their own scam and the resulting distress, and it’s the scammer who really owes Mr S his money back. But in this case between Mr S and Monzo, I’m just looking at what Mr S and Monzo might be liable for. And having carefully considered everything that both sides have said and provided, I can’t fairly hold Monzo liable for Mr S’s loss. I’ll explain why. It’s not in dispute that Mr S authorised the payments involved. So although he didn’t intend for the money to end up with a scammer, under the Payment Services Regulations he is liable for the payments he authorises and the resulting loss in the first instance. And broadly speaking, Monzo had an obligation to follow his instructions – the starting position in law is that banks are expected to process payments which a customer authorises them to make.

-- 1 of 2 --

Monzo should have been on the lookout for payments which could be the result of fraud or scams, to help prevent them. But a balance must be struck between identifying and responding to potentially fraudulent payments, and ensuring there’s minimal disruption to legitimate payments. I’ve thought carefully about whether Monzo should have done more in Mr S’s case. While I appreciate that this was a substantial amount for Mr S to lose in total – again, he has my sympathy there – the spending wasn’t so large or rapid that it would’ve stood out as being remarkable. The payments were each of a relatively unconcerning size to the bank, and were relatively spread out. While they were going to a crypto site, that alone didn’t mean Monzo had to intervene, and here they were made from a sufficient balance, to an account of Mr S’s, at an established exchange. Mr S didn’t speak to Monzo about the payments at the time they were made, so at the time they wouldn’t have been aware of factors like him being pressured or him intending to send the crypto on to someone else. Overall, given what Monzo would’ve reasonably known at the time, I don’t think they had enough cause for concern to need to intervene here. I’ve then considered what Monzo did to try to recover the money after Mr S told them about the scam. Unfortunately, it wasn’t possible for Monzo to recover funds which Mr S had already sent on in crypto. And any funds remaining in Mr S’s own crypto account were still in his name, so there’d be nothing more for Monzo to do there either. Further, there was no chargeback reason which would’ve been appropriate here. A chargeback would’ve been a claim against Mr S’s own crypto exchange rather than the scammer. And the exchange provided the service they were supposed to. There was no realistic prospect of success for a chargeback, and chargebacks are voluntary, so Monzo didn’t need to try one in this case. As these were card payments to Mr S’s own crypto account, they were not covered by schemes like the CRM Code or the PSR’s latest rules. And I’m afraid there was nothing more that Monzo could’ve reasonably done to get the money back here. Finally, I appreciate that the scammer caused Mr S a great deal of distress. But as I noted before, it’s the scammer who caused that distress, rather than Monzo. I understand Monzo did add some acute stress on top, in the way they handled Mr S’s complaint. But I find that the £50 compensation they paid him is fair to put those customer service issues right. So while I’m very sorry to hear about what the scammer did to Mr S, I don’t think Monzo can fairly be held responsible for his loss. I can’t fairly tell Monzo to reimburse Mr S or pay him any further compensation in this case. My final decision For the reasons I’ve explained, I don’t uphold this complaint. This final decision marks the end of our service’s consideration of the case. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr S to accept or reject my decision before 21 April 2026. Adam Charles Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --