The call arrives at the end of the day. The number displayed is that of your agency. At the end of the wire, one « fraud adviser » knows your name, your address, sometimes your last operations. He announces suspicious payments and asks you to validate a notification in your application to block them. Ten minutes later, several thousand euro left your account. And the next day, your bank tells you that you validated the transactions yourself, so she won't repay anything.
This response is common. She's often questionable.
What the law imposes on the bank
The principle is laid down in the Monetary and Financial Code. Where a payment transaction has not been authorised by the customer, the bank must refund it immediately and no later than the end of the first working day following the notification (Article L. 133-18). It can only be avoided in two cases: if the client acted fraudulently, or if he committed serious negligence in the retention of his security data (Article L. 133-19).
The decisive point is proof. It is up to the bank to demonstrate serious negligence, not the customer to prove his good faith. And the text states that the mere fact that the transaction was authenticated with your identifiers is not necessarily sufficient to establish that you have authorized it or that you have been negligent (Article L. 133-23). In other words, « you have validated in the application » is not, by itself, a ground for refusal.
False advisor: why serious negligence is discussed
In fraud to the false advisor, the fraud usurp the bank number and rely on personal information obtained elsewhere. The victim sincerely believes in talking to her institution and thinks of cancelling a fraud, not validating a payment. The judges then examine the concrete circumstances: was the number displayed the number of the bank? Did the contact person have confidential data? Was the wording of the notification clear? Has the bank detected unusual transactions by their amount, recipient or pace?
Case law is evolving in favour of clients, both French and European. The ECJ decision of 15 October 2026 on serious negligence is part of this movement and deserves to be invoked in any claim.
Good reflexes in the first hours
Oppose the card and online access as soon as you understand fraud, from the application or through the bank's official number. Report transactions in writing, by registered mail or by secure courier, specifically requesting reimbursement based on article L. 133-18. The legal deadline for contesting is 13 months from debit (Article L. 133-24), but the faster the alert is, the stronger the record.
File a complaint, or report on the Perceval platform for card fraud. Keep everything: call log, SMS, emails, notifications screenshots, statements. These pieces are used to show that you were deceived, not reckless.
If the bank refuses
A refusal by standard mail is not an end of the file. Respond with a written complaint to customer service, then enter the bank mediator if the answer does not come or remains negative within two months. Mediation is free. It does not prevent subsequent legal action.
When the money is large or the bank maintains its position, the analysis of the file by a professional often changes the outcome. The site lawyer in banking law details the admissible arguments and decisions obtained, and the page devoted to the recourse of victims of bank fraud reviews each situation: false adviser, fraudulent transfer, pirated card, fraud to the president.
What to remember
The bank cannot refuse the repayment solely on the ground that the transaction has been validated. It must prove serious negligence, and manipulation by a false counselor does not automatically characterize it. Act quickly, in writing, supporting documents, and do not stop at the first refusal.