APP scam reimbursement: what UK customers can claim
UK reimbursement rules now give many victims of authorised push payment scams much stronger protection, but the scheme has boundaries. The payment route, date, customer type, claim timing and the victim’s conduct can all affect the outcome.
For qualifying APP scams over Faster Payments or CHAPS, the mandatory reimbursement regime applies to payments made from 7 October 2024. The standard maximum is £85,000 per claim; firms may apply an excess of up to £100, but not to qualifying vulnerable consumers. Claims should be reported quickly and normally no later than 13 months after the final scam payment.
First check whether the payment is in scope
An APP scam is one where you authorised the payment but were deceived about who you were paying or why. That is different from an unauthorised card transaction. The mandatory regime covers qualifying Faster Payments and CHAPS scam payments in the UK and applies to individuals and certain small organisations.
Payment route matters. A crypto transfer, cash handover or card purchase is not automatically covered by the APP reimbursement rules simply because a scam was involved. Tell the bank exactly how the money left so it can put the claim into the correct process.
Practical check: You were tricked into sending £6,800 by bank transfer to someone impersonating a solicitor. Write down the amount, date, deadline and channel before you act, then compare the payment rail, payment date, whether the claim falls within the APP reimbursement regime, the bank warnings shown and the evidence of deception. Report the scam to the sending bank immediately and ask it to log an APP fraud reimbursement claim, not merely a generic transfer query. Keep payment confirmation, scam messages, phone numbers, bank warnings, police or Action Fraud reference if available and the bank claim number together so a later conversation with the bank starts from a verified record rather than memory.
Current UK APP reimbursement rules cover qualifying Faster Payments and CHAPS scam payments made on or after 7 October 2024. The maximum mandatory reimbursement is £85,000 per claim. Firms generally reimburse within five business days, although the clock can be stopped for necessary information and the outcome must normally be reached within 35 business days. A firm may apply an excess of up to £100, but not to a vulnerable consumer.
£85,000 is a cap, not a guaranteed payout
The standard maximum reimbursement is £85,000 per qualifying claim. A bank can choose to pay more, but the mandatory rule does not require it to reimburse above the cap. An optional excess of up to £100 can be applied by the payment firm.
Example: if an in-scope victim loses £6,500 and the bank applies a £100 excess, the reimbursable amount could be £6,400 if the rest of the claim qualifies. If the victim is treated as vulnerable in a way that materially affected their ability to protect themselves, the excess and consumer-standard rules can be disapplied.
Use a small decision table for this situation. Start with You were tricked into sending £6,800 by bank transfer to someone impersonating a solicitor. Verify the payment rail, payment date, whether the claim falls within the APP reimbursement regime, the bank warnings shown and the evidence of deception before choosing. That prevents one unclear detail from driving the whole decision. Report the scam to the sending bank immediately and ask it to log an APP fraud reimbursement claim, not merely a generic transfer query.
Report fast and preserve the trail
Contact the sending bank immediately, even if you feel embarrassed or are still hoping the recipient will return the money. Give the payee details, payment references, dates, amounts and the messages or calls that persuaded you to pay. The faster the report, the better the chance of tracing or freezing remaining funds.
The PSR framework expects many decisions within five business days, although a firm can stop the clock for necessary information and must reach an outcome within the longer permitted period. Do not create that delay yourself by deleting the chat history or withholding the scammer’s instructions because they are uncomfortable to read.
For You were tricked into sending £6,800 by bank transfer to someone impersonating a solicitor., preserve payment confirmation, scam messages, phone numbers, bank warnings, police or Action Fraud reference if available and the bank claim number. Put the items in date order and add a short note explaining what each item proves. Do not bury the key fact inside dozens of screenshots. Report the scam to the sending bank immediately and ask it to log an APP fraud reimbursement claim, not merely a generic transfer query.
The bank can examine your standard of caution
The rules do not create automatic reimbursement regardless of conduct. Firms can consider whether the consumer ignored a specific, tailored warning, failed to report promptly after discovering the scam, failed to provide requested information or did not consent to a police report where required. The test is not simply whether the bank displayed any generic fraud banner.
A useful response is factual: explain which warning you saw, what the scammer told you, why you believed the payment was genuine and what you did when you realised the truth. Avoid rewriting the story to sound more careful than it was; inconsistencies weaken a claim.
Worked decision point: You were tricked into sending £6,800 by bank transfer to someone impersonating a solicitor. Before taking an irreversible step, verify the payment rail, payment date, whether the claim falls within the APP reimbursement regime, the bank warnings shown and the evidence of deception through a channel you chose yourself. Report the scam to the sending bank immediately and ask it to log an APP fraud reimbursement claim, not merely a generic transfer query. If the bank rejects or reduces reimbursement, ask for the precise reason, the rule relied on and the complaint route so you can challenge the decision with evidence.
If the reimbursement decision is wrong, complain
Ask the bank to explain which rule or evidence it relied on. If the problem is the way the bank handled the scam or reimbursement claim, a formal complaint uses the payment-services/fraud timetable: normally 15 business days for a response, with a longer backstop in limited circumstances.
If you remain unhappy after the final response, the Financial Ombudsman Service can consider the complaint. Keep the reimbursement decision, complaint correspondence and the original scam evidence together; they tell different parts of the case.
A reimbursement claim is easier to assess when you distinguish the scam story from the payment facts. The story might involve a fake investment adviser, romance scam or impersonation call, but the payment facts are more mechanical: which account sent the money, which payment system was used, how many transfers were made, when the final payment left, what warnings appeared and when you reported it. Build that list before arguing about fairness. It helps the bank identify whether the mandatory regime applies and gives you a clear basis for challenging a rejection if the wrong rule is used.
Sources and verification
- Payment Systems Regulator - APP fraud reimbursement protections
- Payment Systems Regulator - Q1 2026 reimbursement dashboard
- Financial Ombudsman Service - Fraud and scams
Victoria Hughes
The most useful change in the APP regime is that the conversation no longer begins with “you authorised it, so that is the end of the matter.” But it is still a rules-based claim. I would document the payment route, total loss, final payment date, tailored warnings, vulnerability factors and the exact moment the scam became apparent. Those details determine which protections apply far more than the label you put on the scam.
MyBankAnswers uses official provider and UK regulatory sources wherever practical. Information is general and does not constitute financial advice.