‘High proportion' of APP scam victims getting their money back under new rules
A 'high proportion' of scam victims are getting their money back since new mandatory fraud reimbursement rules were launched last October, according to the regulator overseeing the policy.
The rules, overseen by the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR), require banks to give people their money back when they have been tricked into transferring it to criminals.
An authorised push payment (APP) reimbursement limit of £85,000 has been applied under the rules, although banks can choose to go further than this and repay higher amounts.
Posting a 'snapshot' of what the regulator has seen so far, its managing director David Geale said on the PSR's website: 'We are pleased with what we've seen in the data and heard from stakeholders in the first few months, which demonstrates that the policy has been successfully implemented – and more consumers have been protected.
'This is testament to the efforts of industry to deliver the best outcomes for victims of APP scams and work with us to resolve any issues.'
Under the new code, reimbursement costs are split between the sending and receiving banks – giving the receiving firm an added incentive to stop the scam happening in the first place.
Mr Geale said: 'A high proportion of APP scam victims are being reimbursed consistently across a larger number of PSPs (payment service providers).
'And while it is too early to draw firm conclusions based on the period covered by this data, we have not seen evidence of spikes in claim volumes that some had feared would occur under the policy.
'Additionally, now that both parties in the payment journey (the sending PSP and the receiving PSP) share the cost of reimbursing victims, there is a much stronger incentive for all PSPs to prevent APP scams from occurring in the first place.
'We are pleased to see PSPs starting to collaborate more in the effort to fight this fraud.'
Looking at compliance data reported by payment service providers, the regulator said that in the first three months of the initiative, 86% of money lost to APP scams was returned to victims, totalling around £27 million.
The regulator said it is not possible to make direct comparisons with data from before its policy due to methodology changes, however 'we note that reimbursement for consumers in 2023 was 68% (by value), as per UK Finance's annual fraud report 2024 data'.
Before the mandatory rules came into force, many banks had signed up to a voluntary reimbursement agreement. However, consumer campaigners raised concerns about banks not applying this consistently.
The PSR said that before the policy went live, some organisations were concerned that there would be a sharp rise in the number of APP scam claims.
But, on its website, it said: 'We have seen no evidence of any increase to date.'
However, claim volumes 'have steadily increased each month and we expect this to continue in the short to medium term as victims become more aware of the policy,' according to the PSR.
Firms can opt to apply an excess of up to £100 when reimbursing customers, but this cannot be applied to vulnerable customers. Some firms have waived the excess.
Some APP fraud victims may also be refused reimbursement if they are deemed to have been 'grossly negligent'.
The PSR's website said: 'Just 2% of total claims were rejected because the consumer standard of caution has not been met. We also heard from industry stakeholders that they did not see a significant shift in customer behaviour as a result of the policy.
'However, we are seeing differences in how frequently firms are applying the exemptions. This is backed up in the data we are seeing: only 23% of firms that received a claim in the period used this exception as a reason for rejecting reimbursement.
'We're working with firms and other stakeholders, including the Financial Ombudsman Service, and will keep under review whether more clarity is needed on when this exception should be applied.'
Rocio Concha, Which? director of policy and advocacy, said: 'Which? campaigned for years to make reimbursement mandatory, so it's encouraging to see that the new rules appear to be having a positive impact, with more APP scam victims getting their money back and a more consistent approach from banks and payment providers.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
15 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Savers won't benefit from Reeves's pension reforms, Labour's own research suggests
Rachel Reeves's radical pensions overhaul will only 'slightly' benefit savers, Labour's own research suggests. Unearthed government documents show that changes brought in by Pension Schemes Bill will provide just 'slightly greater expected returns', despite the Chancellor's promises to deliver 'bigger pots for savers.' The Bill, which is set to become law next year, proposes giving regulators the ability to force defined contribution schemes to invest in private markets. But in a best case scenario, this will only add £5,000 to an average pension pot after 30 years, Government forecasts show. Experts have repeatedly warned that the Chancellor risks 'sacrificing' people's long-term retirement goals in pursuit of economic growth. Meanwhile, Ms Reeves has claimed that the Bill is a 'game changer' that would deliver bigger returns. Currently, the majority of defined contribution schemes are invested in public markets, such as government and corporate bonds or stocks and shares. The private market, such as start-ups and infrastructure projects, only makes up a small portion of pension fund portfolios. But under Ms Reeves's changes, regulators could be given a reserve power to force schemes to invest in UK private markets. Mike Ambery, of Standard Life, said he did not expect the reserve power to be used, but he questioned why it was added to the Bill in the first place when already positively being actioned. Under the voluntary Mansion House Accord, 17 of the UK's largest defined contribution scheme providers pledged to invest at least 5pc of their assets in UK private markets by 2030. Defined contribution pensions are schemes that savers pay in to to build up a pot of money over time. Tom Selby, of AJ Bell, said: 'Pension schemes should fundamentally be investing to deliver the best possible returns for savers, regardless of where those assets are held.' 'There is a real danger in conflating the Government's increasingly desperate efforts to deliver economic growth with people's long-term retirement goals that the latter will be sacrificed in pursuit of the former. 'Ministers need to be straight with people about the risks inherent in this approach, rather than denying the uncertainty that exists and claiming this is somehow a guaranteed win-win for savers and the UK economy.' The Chancellor has already faced criticism over other parts of the Bill, namely allowing defined benefit pension schemes to transfer surplus funds back into businesses. Firms will be allowed to raid £160bn in defined benefit pension surpluses, loosening existing safeguards that protect pensions from riskier investments. Around 8.8 million savers are members of a defined benefit pension scheme. They provide a guaranteed income for life, typically based on someone's final salary. The majority of defined benefit schemes are now running at a surplus thanks to increased investment returns and higher interest rates. Steve Webb, partner at pension consultants LCP, said: 'The Government's primary objective in changing the way pension funds are invested is to boost the UK economy rather than to boost individual pensions. 'The Government's own projections suggest that even after several decades of the new approach, the impact on individual pension pots is likely to be slight. 'Given that we clearly have an under-saving crisis in the UK, with millions set for a disappointing retirement, there needs to be much greater urgency around measures to get more money flowing into pension savings'. The Department for Work and Pensions was contacted for comment.
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
How plug-in solar panels could help Britons save 30% on energy bills
Your support helps us to tell the story Read more Support Now From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference. Read more Britons could soon buy cheap solar panels which can be put on balconies, sheds and terraces to cut their energy bills. The plan, using so-called plug-in solar modules which typically cut bills by 30 per cent in countries where they are already used, has been announced by the government as part of a broader plan to step up solar power access. Using balconies for solar panels is already common in Germany, where 1.5 million homes use the technology. Locals have named it Balkonkraftwerk, or balcony power plant. Using solar panels this way is a lot cheaper than installing them on a roof, where scaffolding and hiring specialist workers means that even a modest eight-panel array will cost about £5,000. It will also unlock solar power for many of Britian's 5.4m households which rent. Presently, only homeowners can opt to fit solar panels unless they agree a deal with their landlord. Even then, if they moved, they would lose their panels. The proposed system is portable. This so-called plug-in power plant also means no expensive fitting is required. Instead, the panels are attached to an inverter, which steps up the voltage to the 240v used by your home's mains supply. It is then attached by a regular plug. To avoid electric shock, the inverters detect when they are unplugged and isolate the plug and its exposed electrical pins. open image in gallery Rooftop panels still produce the most ebergy but they are expensive to fit ( Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. ) The government is investigating whether a similar safe system can be deployed in the UK. Unlike a full rooftop solar system, no power can be sold back to the grid with plug-in panels. Instead, the aim is to cut electricity bills during the day from appliances like fridges, freezers and computers used by home workers. The panels also probably won't face upwards for the best power generation, since roofs are still the best for that. But plummeting solar panel prices and climbing prices for having them fitted to a roof mean that balcony panels are now a more attractive option than in previous years. Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Ed Miliband said solar 'is one of the cheapest and quickest to build power sources we have.' He added: 'We will push ahead on a solar rooftop revolution, while tackling the barriers of planning, grid, supply chains and skills.' In Germany, a pair of 400-watt panels could save €120 to €240 a year in electricity costs, according to consumer website Finanztip, which could be 30 per cent off a smaller flat's usage, according to manufacturer estimates. Panels can last 30 years if looked after well, and the €540 they can cost can be recouped in a few years, depending on usage.
BBC News
17 minutes ago
- BBC News
'Very frustrating for Newcastle and Howe so far'
Our chief football writer Phil McNulty has been taking your asked: Why do we (Newcastle United) seem to be struggling to get deals done? Eddie Howe said he wanted business done early but we haven't been able to attract our top targets. It's a little bit of a replied: It has been frustrating as I was at Newcastle on the last day of the season when Eddie Howe said it was imperative business was done quickly. But this has not is not as if they have not been trying, but they have been unable to agree deals and now it looks like Joao Pedro, a prime target, is off to Chelsea.I think this was always a fear behind the scenes at Newcastle, with the attraction of London and extending the ex-Brighton clan of Marc Cucurella, Moises Caicedo and Robert plenty of time to bring in new faces – but there is no escaping the fact it has all been very frustrating for Newcastle and Howe so far.
