APP scam reimbursement rules in the UK: when can victims get money back?
The UK reimbursement regime gives many victims of authorised push payment scams stronger protection, but it is not a blanket guarantee that every scam transfer will be refunded.
For qualifying APP scam payments made through Faster Payments and certain CHAPS payments, the mandatory reimbursement regime can require sending payment firms to reimburse eligible consumers. The maximum reimbursement level is £85,000 per claim. Firms can apply a limited excess in some cases, and exceptions can apply, so victims should report the scam immediately and provide a clear record of what happened.
What an APP scam is
An authorised push payment scam happens when a victim is deceived into authorising a bank transfer to an account controlled by a criminal. The payment itself is technically authorised by the customer, which historically made reimbursement harder than for card fraud where the customer never approved the transaction. Typical examples include purchase scams, impersonation scams, investment scams and fraudsters posing as banks or police.
The newer reimbursement framework changes the starting position for many eligible payments, but the payment method and customer category matter. A scam paid by card, cash, cheque or cryptocurrency does not automatically fall under the APP bank-transfer regime merely because the underlying deception was similar.
The mandatory regime has a reimbursement maximum
The Payment Systems Regulator’s framework applies to qualifying Faster Payments and, through aligned arrangements, certain CHAPS APP scam payments. The current maximum reimbursement level is £85,000 per claim. That figure is a regulatory cap under the scheme, not a statement that every loss below £85,000 will always be reimbursed automatically.
Payment firms can in some cases apply an excess up to the permitted amount, with protections for vulnerable consumers. Detailed eligibility and exceptions matter, so a victim should ask the bank to identify the rule it is applying rather than accepting a vague statement that the payment was 'authorised'.
Customer conduct still matters
The regime includes a consumer standard of caution. Customers can be expected to pay attention to interventions from their bank, report the scam promptly and cooperate with reasonable requests for information. There are protections around vulnerability, and the rules are not intended to punish people who were unable to protect themselves because of their circumstances.
This is another reason to preserve the evidence. Save messages, adverts, fake invoices, websites, beneficiary details, call logs and the bank’s warnings. A timeline showing what the criminal said and what warnings appeared can be central to understanding whether the reimbursement rules were applied fairly.
Report the scam immediately
Contact the sending bank through an official fraud channel as soon as you realise what happened. State clearly that you were deceived into making an authorised bank transfer. Ask the bank to attempt recovery from the receiving institution and to register the reimbursement claim. Speed can matter because stolen money can be moved quickly through multiple accounts.
Do not continue negotiating with the scammer or send a second payment to unlock the first. Recovery scams often target victims immediately after the original fraud, promising to retrieve the money for an upfront fee. Treat any unsolicited recovery offer as a new potential scam.
If the bank rejects the claim
Ask for the decision and reasons in writing. Compare the bank’s explanation with the reimbursement rules and the evidence you provided. If you believe the bank applied an exception incorrectly or handled the case poorly, use the bank’s formal complaint process. Eligible disputes can then be referred to the Financial Ombudsman Service after the bank has had the opportunity to respond.
Keep the complaint focused on the relevant points: payment method, dates, warnings, vulnerability where relevant, reporting time and cooperation. A clear file is much more useful than repeatedly retelling the story in different words to different agents.
What the £85,000 cap does — and does not — mean
The reimbursement maximum is applied to the qualifying claim under the scheme; it is not a minimum loss required to make a claim. Someone who loses £800 should still report the scam immediately, just as someone who loses £80,000 should. For losses above the cap, report the entire amount because other recovery, complaint or legal routes may still be relevant.
Do not let discussion of the cap delay the first recovery attempt. The receiving account can move money onward quickly. The first call should be about stopping and tracing funds; the detailed reimbursement assessment can follow with the evidence.
The receiving and sending firms share responsibilities within the reimbursement framework, but the customer should normally start with the provider from which the money was sent. Give one coherent account of the scam and update it if new evidence appears. Multiple fragmented calls can create inconsistent notes, so ask for a claim or case reference and use it in later contact.
Sources and verification
Victoria Hughes — Consumer Rights Specialist
The biggest change in APP fraud is that “you authorised the payment” is no longer the end of the reimbursement conversation for many qualifying bank transfers. But I would not describe the current regime as automatic insurance. Coverage depends on the payment type and the rules, and customer conduct can still be examined. If a scam happens, speed and evidence are the priorities. Call the bank, say explicitly that you were deceived into making an APP transfer, ask for recovery action and keep every message or warning. I would also write a simple timeline while the details are fresh. If the bank refuses reimbursement, insist on the exact reason and rule rather than a generic fraud decision. The £85,000 maximum is significant, but customers with larger losses should still report the full amount and pursue every available route. Finally, beware of recovery fraud. A victim who has just lost money is a valuable target to criminals who promise guaranteed refunds for another payment. I would never wait to work out whether a loss is 'big enough' for the rules. The bank needs to know immediately. Scheme eligibility is assessed after the urgent recovery step, not before it. I ask for a case reference on the first call and use that reference consistently, so every later document and conversation attaches to one clear claim history.
MyBankAnswers uses official provider and UK regulatory sources wherever practical. Information is general and does not constitute financial advice.