Overview of Complaints 2023 | Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman
12
Complainants referencing fraud
The upward trend continues in the number of complainants referencing fraud.
Financial fraud is becoming more sophisticated, and as technology moves ahead in
leaps and bounds, it can often result in even the savviest of consumers falling prey
to seemingly legitimate, but fraudulent, schemes and scams.
It is important to note that the FSPO cannot investigate instances of fraud, as that
is a matter for An Garda Síochána. However, the FSPO can investigate a complaint
which relates to suggested service failings of the nancial service provider in
dealing with a customer who suspects fraud on their account, and any complaint
about disputed transactions.
This Overview highlights some of these complaints, through the use of
anonymised case studies, where the customer came to the FSPO because they felt
their bank had not dealt with their issue appropriately.
One case study highlights the case of Diana who complained to her bank after
she had transferred €2,720 to an online trading platform, which she said was then
transferred to a fraudulent investment company. Diana hoped her bank could
recover her money through the chargeback process. Although the bank still held
Diana liable for the transactions, it noted some service issues with the handling
of her complaint. The bank noted that Diana had been credited €1721.23 by the
online trading company and offered to refund Diana an additional €1,720 as a
gesture of goodwill.
In another case study, Marie was the victim of a scam, which was carried out by
fraudsters claiming to be from the Department of Social Protection and An Garda
Síochána. Marie was informed by the fraudsters that someone had stolen her
identity, and that this person was suspected of money laundering. She transferred
€17,000 to a foreign bank account before she realised it was a scam. Although the
bank emphasised it was not responsible for Marie’s loss, it did acknowledge that
its customer service fell short of its standards. It offered Marie €4,000 in full and
nal settlement of her complaint, which she accepted.
Eileen was an elderly lady who sent a total of €82,000 to a care worker abroad,
as a result of an ad she had seen online. She nally realised that she had been the
victim of a scam when there was no sign of the care worker coming to Ireland.
Eileen’s bank said that Eileen had authorised all of the payments herself, so it was
not responsible for the loss. However, Eileen said that the bank staff member
never queried why an 80-year-old woman was sending so much money, so often,
to a very distant country. The parties resolved the dispute in mediation and on
that basis, the bank agreed to refund Eileen’s money.