Metro Bank PLC · DRN-6053987

The complaint Mr O complains Metro Bank PLC (“Metro”) won’t refund the money he lost when he paid for a service he didn’t receive. What happened Mr O signed up to a training course offered by a provider I’ll refer to as “F”. F was promoting a lifetime course and mentoring scheme that purported to teach its students how to invest in the property market. To pay for the course, Mr O made a payment of £20,000 from his account at Metro to F on 5 November 2024 via bank transfer. However, a few months later, F went into liquidation and was unable to provide the services Mr O paid for. Mr O contacted Metro and requested a refund under the chargeback scheme as he had paid for services he did not receive. Metro declined to offer Mr O a refund of the amount lost. It said that there was no mechanism in place for him to receive a refund of the payment made via bank transfer as the chargeback scheme rules only applied to card payments. Metro said it couldn’t help Mr O further. Mr O was unhappy with Metro’s response. He said he knew of another person who had been able to get their money back from their bank and he didn’t think Metro was treating him fairly. Mr O brought his complaint to this service where one of our investigators looked into things. The investigator did not uphold the complaint. They said there were no rules or regulations that applied to bank transfers that meant Metro needed to refund customers who’d paid for a service they didn’t receive. Mr O didn’t agree with the investigator and asked for his case to be considered by an ombudsman, so it has been passed to me to decide. 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’d firstly like to say how sorry I am to hear about what’s happened to Mr O. I can fully understand why he wants to get his money back. However, whilst I’m sorry to disappoint him, I agree with the outcome reached by the investigator, for the same reasons as they have previously set out. This isn’t a complaint I can uphold. I’m satisfied Metro has considered Mr O’s claim under the relevant regulations and it doesn’t need to provide Mr O with a refund of the amount lost now. I’ll explain why in more detail below. Chargeback

-- 1 of 2 --

Chargeback is a voluntary scheme which is operated by some card issuers and it is dealt with under the applicable cards’ rules. The option to raise a chargeback is available in a range of circumstances where there's a dispute between a cardholder and a merchant. However, the chargeback rules do not apply to payments made via bank transfer and this is the reason Metro hasn’t been able to raise a chargeback claim for the payment Mr O made using this method. Unfortunately for Mr O, there are no rules that apply to bank transfers that say he should receive a refund for goods and services paid for but not received. And there is no mechanism in place for Metro to have claimed these funds back from F either. This means Metro has no obligation to offer its customers a refund where they have paid funds to a legitimate business that has ultimately failed. And so, I can’t fairly and reasonably say Metro has done anything wrong in declining to offer Mr O a refund of the amount lost now. I understand Mr O was disappointed that Metro had originally treated his claim as a fraud claim and I understand why this made him feel that he had not been listened to. However, it appears that Metro considered whether Mr O had been the victim of a scam or not, as if the payment had been deemed fraudulent, Mr O may have been due a refund. So, I’m satisfied that at the time, Metro was trying to establish if there was a possibility that Mr O was due a refund under the only applicable regulations rather than failing to engage with his complaint to avoid paying him a refund, as he has suggested. I understand Mr O knows of someone else who also paid funds to F who has now received a refund from a third-party bank. I’m not aware of the reason why this bank has chosen to offer someone else a refund and not Mr O. However, I don’t think this means Mr O should now also be due a refund from Metro. As I’ve said above, there are no rules or regulations that apply to bank transfers that mean Mr O is now due a refund from Metro and The Financial Ombudsman Service assesses each case bought to it on its own individual merits. In the particular circumstances of this complaint, I’m not persuaded that Metro needs to offer Mr O a refund of the amount lost or that it needs to take any further action. My final decision My final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint against Metro Bank PLC. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr O to accept or reject my decision before 21 April 2026. Emly Hanley Hayes Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --