Also, apparently the declined transaction shows up, but it takes a while. It didn't show up on my list even though I got the notification, so I thought it just doesn't show and I went to the limits to raise them.
I have had multiple times when the most recent transaction showed up only after restarting the Revolut app.
What if he was removing it to make a completely different payment?
It seems like terrible UX to not allow/require individual approve/reject on transactions that triggered the limit.
This would have been a massive improvement, agreed. Maybe they have to make a call within a few seconds and can't ask your permission first, though, so maybe that's not possible.
Still, the notification could have shown "Your transaction to MERCHANT for AMOUNT on CARD was declined because of your limit". That would have avoided this whole disaster.
I suspect that by wanting to move fast they put less emphasis on the features that are more time-consuming to implement.
I am guessing that you are the author of this blog post. For a long term user, you seem to have made a lot of assumptions and mistakes. You also seem to have a few cards on your account. I can't tell if you froze ALL of your cards, either immediately upon discovering the fraudulent event or before raising/disabling limits and then 'deal' with the rogue virtual card afterwards.
Revolut is a pre-paid card. You can't expect expect the same level of protection or consumer rights, which are provided by a Credit Card or a bank registered in your jurisdiction.
Regardless, you should post this in the Revolut community for more visibility and probably get an actual resolution, before jumping on the GDPR angle ─ which will fail to provide with you enough details, as most financial institutions will redact any information on fraudulent transactions ─ stating in some vague language that it is an on-going fraud/crime investigation, hence they are not allowed to discuss it etc.
Good luck.
What were they?
> I can't tell if you froze ALL of your cards, either immediately upon discovering the fraudulent event or before raising/disabling limits and then 'deal' with the rogue virtual card afterwards.
I froze the card the charge was made on immediately after I discovered the fraudulent transaction, yes. I didn't freeze anything before removing the limit because I didn't think it was fraud until quite a bit after I saw the large transaction go through.
Initially I thought my work had used my card to book a trip for me or something similar. I didn't even imagine someone could have gotten my card details somehow.
I must be missing something here. Is sharing your card details with your workplace, so they can spend your money on your behalf, a normal thing for you (or anybody) to do? Legitimately asking here because I don't understand this at all.
Let's say someone shares their card details with their workplace. For some reason beyond your or mine understanding. Which causes them, in a rush, to think "Ah, must be that, I'll drop the limit". Does this justify that person losing their money that was stolen from them via fraudulent charges?
Er, are you sure?
In the UK marketing: https://www.revolut.com/a-radically-better-account
it is described as "Free UK current account". That's the name of a full, normal, bank account. I would expect it to have the full consumer protection, FSCS, etc.
If it doesn't, they're committing some pretty massive advertising fraud...
You can expect all you like, but there is no UK FSCS protection. They have frequently ran into trouble with their advertising campaigns!
https://www.pymnts.com/news/payment-methods/2019/revolut-ad-...
The hell I can't. If they can't make their service secure and stand behind it when they fail, they have no business providing the service at all.
What Revolut's legal status and responsibilities are, I don't know. (Although the update says that they did eventually refund him, so clearly someone was aware they fucked up.) But implying that it's the user's fault for not anticipating Revolut's insecurity is absurd. He did make a mistake, but so did Revolut, and they should have (and, eventually, did) make it right.
I also use them as my main debit card, because I (mistakenly) thought that the immediate notifications and safety limits would keep me safer in case of fraudulent transactions.
My comment was referencing the above statement from the blog post, which highlights the fact that using this card as a debit card is not a prudent decision. There was absolutely no implication that Revolut was blameless, in any way whatsoever!
I am glad that the matter has now been resolved. For your reference, this card is not protected under the UK Financial Services Compensation Scheme, neither does it provide protection under Section 75 of Consumer Credit Act 1974. However, it is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority(FCA) under Electronic Money Regulations 2011 and Section 12 describes the complaint handling procedure, which requires the consumer to follow the dispute resolution process by contacting the business first, before escalating it to the Financial Ombudsman Service. In most cases, there is a resolution before it reaches FOS.
https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/archive/emoney-approach.p...