Your Bank Has Refused to Refund Your APP Fraud Loss
You trusted what seemed like a genuine request. You transferred money. It went to fraudsters. And now your bank has told you they will not be refunding the loss.
Receiving a rejection can be frustrating. The mandatory reimbursement rules introduced in 2024 were supposed to protect people in exactly this situation. Yet you have a rejection letter or email citing reasons that may use complex regulatory terms. Carefully review what grounds your bank has given, because understanding the specific basis for refusal is the first step toward challenging the decision.

Got a text, call, email or offer that feels off? Paste it in below and we will tell you how scammy it looks, the warning signs to spot, and exactly what to do next.
Try our Scam Detector free, here on this site →Why Banks Refuse APP Fraud Refunds Under the Mandatory Rules
Payment service providers must now reimburse victims of APP fraud in most cases. But the rules contain exclusions, and banks are applying them.
Gross negligence: This is a high legal bar. It means more than being careless. Banks must show you ignored clear, specific warnings or behaved recklessly. Simply falling for a convincing scam does not meet this threshold. However, some banks are citing it more frequently than regulators expected. If your rejection letter mentions this, the bank is claiming you acted with serious disregard for obvious risk, not merely that you were deceived.
Effective warnings: Your bank may argue they gave you a warning during the payment process and you ignored it. For this defence to stand, the warning must have been specific, timely and relevant to the scam type. Generic pop-ups about fraud may not qualify. Check exactly what warning appeared, when it appeared, and whether it addressed the actual fraud you encountered.
Excess and caps: The mandatory scheme includes a claim excess and a maximum reimbursement limit. If your loss was small, the excess may reduce or eliminate your refund. If your loss exceeded the cap, the mandatory rules do not cover the excess amount. Check the current figures on the Payment Systems Regulator website, as these may be updated.
International payments: The mandatory scheme covers payments between UK accounts. If you sent money to an account abroad, the reimbursement rules generally do not apply. Check your bank's specific policy, as some may offer protections beyond the minimum requirements.
Crypto exchange transfers: Payments to cryptocurrency exchanges fall outside the scope of the mandatory rules. Fraudsters are aware of this gap. If you were directed to buy crypto and transfer it, your bank will likely refuse on this basis. Again, individual bank policies may vary.
Time limits: You must report the fraud to your bank promptly. The regulations specify reporting deadlines, and delayed reporting can be grounds for refusal. Note exactly when you discovered the fraud, when you reported it, and when the bank responded. The bank also has obligations to respond within set timeframes.
Your situation may be slightly different. ask a question below ↓ and our editorial team will reply with our advice.
What You Can Do Now
A rejection is not final. Options are available to formally contest the bank's decision.
- Internal complaint: Make a formal complaint to your bank. State clearly why you believe the refusal is wrong. Reference the specific ground they cited and explain why it should not apply. Request their final response in writing. Keep copies of everything you submit.
- Financial Ombudsman Service: If the bank rejects your complaint or takes more than eight weeks to respond, escalate to the FOS. The Ombudsman will assess whether your bank followed the rules properly. Reference the Payment Systems Regulator's mandatory reimbursement requirements. The FOS is free to use and their decision is binding on the bank.
- Subject Access Request: Under data protection law, you can require your bank to provide all information they hold about you, including fraud team internal notes. This can reveal what they recorded, what checks they performed, and what warnings they claim to have shown you. Submit this to the bank's data protection team. Allow up to one month for a response.
- Action Fraud report: Report the fraud to Action Fraud. This does not recover your money directly, but it creates an official record and may support future civil recovery efforts.
- Additional resources: Consumer advisory organisations can provide guidance. MoneySavingExpert maintains updated information on APP fraud claims and bank complaint processes. UK Finance publishes industry perspectives on fraud prevention.
Gathering What You Need
Methodical preparation strengthens your complaint. Collect and organise: the rejection letter with the specific grounds cited, screenshots of any warnings displayed during the payment process, records of all communications with the fraudster, bank statements showing the payments, and a detailed timeline of when you discovered and reported the fraud.
Keep copies of all correspondence with your bank. Note dates, times, reference numbers and the names of anyone you speak with. Organised records demonstrate you are taking the process seriously and make it harder for vague responses to stand.
For current figures, procedures and complaint forms, check the Payment Systems Regulator, FCA website and Financial Ombudsman Service directly. Rules and thresholds can change, and official sources will have the latest position.
Your bank's refusal may be lawful. Or it may be an attempt to avoid paying out under circumstances where the rules require reimbursement. The only way to determine which is to challenge it properly.
Ask Safe from Scams a question
Ask our editorial team a question and we will reply with our advice. Tell us as much about your situation as you can: the more detail you give, the more useful our answer can be.
You do not need to use your real name. Please do not include your full address, phone number, email address, or the names of other people. We may edit or remove identifying details for privacy and legal reasons.
Comments are moderated before publication.