TSB Bank plc · DRN-6228832

The complaint Ms H complains that TSB Bank plc won’t refund two Automated Teller Machine (ATM) withdrawals which debited her account even though she didn’t receive the cash. What happened Ms H says that on 28 May 2025 she attempted to withdraw two amounts of £250 from her TSB account at an ATM with another provider. For both attempts, she says the cash wasn’t dispensed but her account wasn’t debited with the £500. Ms H contacted TSB to explain what had happened and asked it to refund the disputed £500. The bank temporarily credited the £500 to her account while it investigated. But having reviewed the evidence presented to it by the ATM provider, it concluded that the cash had been dispensed for both withdrawals and it re-debited the funds from Ms H’s account. This left Ms H’s account overdrawn. Ms H brought a complaint to this service where it was considered by one of our investigators. She reviewed the evidence and concluded that TSB had shown that the transactions had been processed correctly. Ms H didn’t agree. She said she wouldn’t lie and she didn’t receive any money on 28 May 2025. She said the machine could say it was dispensed, but she didn’t receive anything and she can’t pay for something she didn’t do. Ms H also said she didn’t try to withdraw any money on 28 May; she tried to take money on 30 May. As no agreement could be reached, the complaint has been passed to me for review and a 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. Having done so, I realise this will come as a huge disappointment to Ms H, but I’ve reached the same conclusion as our investigator. Firstly, it’s important to note that this decision focuses on the transactions Ms H originally reported – on 28 May 2025. If she now believes the transactions in dispute were made on a different day, then she’ll need to raise them separately with TSB so it has a chance to investigate further. When it comes to TSB’s responsibilities, the regulations relevant to this complaint are The Payment Services Regulations 2017. Section 75 says: Where a payment service user — (a) denies having authorised an executed payment transaction; or (b) claims that a payment transaction has not been correctly executed,

-- 1 of 2 --

it is for the payment service provider to prove that the payment transaction was authenticated, accurately recorded, entered in the payment service provider's accounts and not affected by a technical breakdown or some other deficiency in the service provided by the payment service provider. So, in the circumstances of Ms H’s complaint, it’s for TSB to show the cash withdrawals Ms H is disputing were completed correctly. Ms H’s card was entered into the ATM and made the first disputed withdrawal at 12:50:48pm on 28 May 2025. The second disputed withdrawal was made at 12:51:34pm. As TSB didn’t own the ATM that Ms H used, it had to contact the company who did for its ATM records. The technical evidence shows that the correct number of notes were counted for both withdrawals, x12 £20’s and x1 £10. No error messages were recorded as I’d expect to see if the transactions had failed due to a problem with the cash. If Ms H’s cash had not been dispensed as she says, I’d also expect to see a discrepancy of £500 when the ATM was next balanced. But the ATM provider has told TSB that when it was balanced no discrepancy was detected, which means the money most likely wasn’t retained by the ATM due to unsuccessful withdrawals. As well as this, I note Ms H said she waited at the ATM for around five minutes before her card came out. I don’t know if she’s referring to the first or the second withdrawal, but the evidence shows this can’t have been the case for either. As above, both withdrawals were recorded as taking place 46 seconds apart. And, 36 seconds after the second withdrawal, someone else entered their card into the machine to use it after Ms H’s withdrawal had finished. So I don’t accept her comments that it took five minutes (or any longer than reasonably expected) for her card to be returned by the ATM. Where there is a dispute about what happened, I must reach my decision on the balance of probabilities – in other words, on what I consider is more likely than not to have happened in light of the available evidence. And here, I think the technical evidence does show that it’s more likely than not that Ms H’s cash was successfully dispensed for both withdrawals. I recognise Ms H wants the CCTV to be reviewed – she was told by the supermarket where the ATM is located that this would need to be requested by either TSB or the Police. But it requested by TSB at the time and I don’t know for sure CCTV showing Ms H’s transactions was or is available. But I don’t think it was unreasonable for TSB to rely on the technical data from the ATM provider to reach a conclusion here. Once again, I’m sorry to disappoint Ms H, but I find it’s more likely than not the cash was properly dispensed for both withdrawals, and in all the circumstances, I don’t think TSB need to refund the disputed amounts to her. I recognise that when TSB re-debited the temporary credit of £500 from Ms H’s account that it went into an overdrawn position. I’d like to remind TSB of its responsibilities of treating any instances of financial difficulties positively and sympathetically when discussing a suitable repayment plan with Ms H. My final decision My final decision is that I don’t uphold Ms H’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Ms H to accept or reject my decision before 20 April 2026. Lorna Wall Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --