Mr Emery concluded that the term needed to describe “a foreseeable risk of loss” and in Claire’s case, he explained that she was not acting “voluntarily” as she was being “socially engineered” so did not understand that there was any risk associated with what she was doing, therefore was not “grossly negligent”.
The case was successful and Santander then repaid Claire the money that was stolen.
Santander has confirmed that since the incident, it has changed its approach to scams and has signed up to the Contingent Reimbursement Model which sets out the consumer protection standards for Authorised Push Payment (APP) scams which banks have to follow.
Santander was one of the original participants for the code and now actively works on fraud protection for its customers.
Claire said: “It had been going on for so long and the day that I received that letter was, it was elation, and it felt so good to be back on track.”
“I had a bottle of champagne in the fridge, ready and waiting, and the day the money was put back in my bank account, I opened it and had a very nice glass, finally it was over!”