Atm Dispute

A payment service provider must prove a payment transaction was correctly executed; absent sufficient evidence, the consumer's credible account of non-receipt prevails.

A service provider is entitled to charge fees for work completed on a client's behalf even if the engagement is terminated before completion, provided the terms of business permit such charges.

An insurer must act fairly and consistently when handling trace and access claims, and must not give mixed messages about cover eligibility or the consumer's responsibility to arrange works.

A business has a duty to mitigate losses by taking reasonable steps to monitor its own accounts and promptly report service failures.

Financial institutions must demonstrate under the Payment Services Regulations 2017 that transactions were properly executed; failure to do so means the consumer is entitled to a refund.

Where a consumer disputes a payment transaction, the business must prove the payment was correctly executed; in the absence of clear evidence, the burden of proof lies with the business.

A bank may lodge a CIFAS fraud marker only where there are reasonable grounds to believe an identified fraud has been committed and the evidence is clear, relevant and rigorous.

An insured party has a legal duty under the Insurance Act 2015 to make a fair presentation of the risk, including disclosure of all circumstances that would influence a prudent insurer's underwriting decision.

A policyholder must demonstrate on balance that an insured event has occurred; if an insurer raises an exclusion, the onus is on them to show it applies.

A bank must demonstrate very persuasive evidence of fraudulent intent before fairly loading a customer's details to a fraud database, requiring proof that the customer made disputed transactions themselves or authorised them while later fal

An insurer must handle claims promptly and fairly, and should not reject a claim unreasonably; a claimant must evidence causation between the insured peril and the loss claimed.

A consumer is not liable for unauthorised transactions unless the Payment Services Regulations 2017 provide limited exceptions, which require evidence that the consumer or someone acting on their behalf authorised the transactions.

A bank is not liable for financial losses incurred as a result of a card block caused by customer error, even if there is a delay in responding to customer service inquiries.

A bank may record a Cifas fraud marker and hold a customer liable for an outstanding balance where it has rigorous evidence that the customer was complicit in receiving fraudulent funds, including evidence of the customer's involvement in t

Credit card quasi-cash transactions are correctly excluded from promotional 0% purchase rates and attract higher interest rates and fees as per the account terms.

A bank is entitled to debit an ATM withdrawal from an account when technical evidence from the ATM journal roll, purge bin records, and balancing information demonstrates the transaction was completed successfully and funds were dispensed.

A bank must have strong evidence of deliberate complicity in receiving fraudulent funds to register a Cifas marker; unwitting involvement should not be marked.