header-logo header-logo

APP fraud: hope for victims?

02 August 2024 / Ashley Fairbrother , Oliver Fredrickson
Issue: 8082 / Categories: Features , Fraud
printer mail-detail
184288
Ashley Fairbrother & Oliver Fredrickson examine recent developments that may improve the outlook for victims of APP fraud
  • Three recent High Court decisions appear to have re-opened the door for victims of APP fraud.
  • In each case, a victim of APP fraud brought a claim against the recipient banks and, in all three cases, the banks’ application for summary judgment was unsuccessful.
  • The cases will now proceed to trial on the grounds of unjust enrichment, dishonest assistance, and the duty to recover and/or retrieve stolen funds.

In 2023, there were a staggering 232,429 reported cases of authorised push payment (APP) fraud in the United Kingdom, causing some £459.7m of loss to victims. As APP fraud has increased in recent years, it has become a regrettable trend for victims to remain out of pocket after the investigation has concluded.

This article follows the journey of APP fraud litigation over the past five years. In particular, it highlights three recent cases—Larsson v Revolut Ltd [2024] EWHC 1287 (Ch), [2024]

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll