Revolut Ltd · DRN-6065264

The complaint Miss K complains Revolut Ltd (“Revolut”) refuses to refund her for transactions on her account she says he didn’t authorise. What happened The facts of this complaint are well known to both parties, so I won’t repeat them in detail here. In short, Miss K says she didn’t authorise transactions between May and August 2025 to the merchant “Vantage”. She says she had lost her phone during this time, which she thinks was used to make the transactions in dispute. Miss K raised chargebacks on these payments via Revolut, but these were rejected. She says Revolut should refund all the payments in dispute as unauthorised. Revolut considered Miss K’s complaint but ultimately felt there was no evidence her account was compromised, and it didn’t believe these payments could’ve been made without Miss K’s knowledge and consent. So, it didn’t refund any money to Miss K. Miss K brought her complaint to our Service, and an investigator considered all the evidence supplied by both parties but ultimately felt it’s more likely than not the transactions were authorised. Miss K didn’t agree with this outcome, so the complaint has been passed to me for a final decision. 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. Before I set out my thoughts, I want to acknowledge that I have summarised this complaint briefly and, in less detail, than has been provided. I’ve focused on what I think is the heart of the matter. Please rest assured that while I may not comment on every point raised, I have considered it. I’m satisfied that I don’t need to comment on every individual point or argument to be able to reach what I think is the right outcome. Our rules allow me to do this and reflect the fact that we are an informal service and a free alternative for consumers to the courts. I’ve carefully reviewed Miss K’s evidence and all the information she’s given us and Revolut. Throughout the complaints process she has provided inconsistent information about her phone and the transactions. Initially she said her phone was lost in July and August, but she later corrected this saying she was confused and actually the phone was lost on 22 June 2025. Even if I accept she made a mistake with the dates, there are further inconsistencies. Miss K now says she has never used the website “Vantage” and never made any payments to it. However, when complaining to Revolut she said that someone else must have used her lost iPhone to login to her Vantage account as the login details were stored on the phone. In some places Miss K says her phone had no password or biometric protection, however I’ve also seen she has referred to her phone passcode and it potentially being compromised. So

-- 1 of 2 --

overall, I do not find Miss K’s evidence to be credible and so I’ve not been able to rely on what she has said. Revolut has shown that there is only one device registered to Miss K’s account. And this is the same device which has been registered since the account opening. It has been used for undisputed activity before, during and after the transactions in dispute. As per Miss K’s statements, there are transfers from Revolut to other accounts in her name. Miss K hasn’t disputed these, and I think it is highly unlikely an unknown third party would transfer money from the available balance to other accounts they don’t have control over. The evidence from Revolut shows that the disputed transactions were recorded on Miss K’s account as card payments, however some were ApplePay transactions and some were 3Ds verified. But I’ve also seen that there are top-ups using ApplePay during June, July and August 2025 which Miss K hasn’t disputed. So, I think it’s likely Miss K had control of this device and the ApplePay linked to it. Even if Miss K didn’t have a passcode on her phone, a passcode would’ve been needed to enter her Revolut app to complete the 3Ds process to approve the disputed payments. From what I understand, ApplePay can only be used on a device if it has biometrics or a passcode to protect its usage. And any security login information cannot be stored on a device unless there is a password or biometrics set up on the device to protect this information. There is no evidence as to how someone else could’ve accessed Miss K’s Revolut app or used the ApplePay on her device, so I think it’s likely these transactions were all carried out by Miss K. Overall, there is no plausible evidence as to how someone else could’ve authorised these payments without Miss K’s knowledge and consent. So, I am not upholding this complaint, and I don’t think Revolut ought to do anything further. My final decision I am not upholding this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss K to accept or reject my decision before 14 April 2026. Sienna Mahboobani Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --