Paris taxi scam cost £493 but Monzo won’t help me

A tourist in Paris was charged €570 for a taxi ride that should have cost €9.70, and their bank, Monzo, refused to reverse the payment despite updated Mastercard chargeback rules that could have supported the claim. The incident occurred after RG took a taxi from a rank outside the Musée d’Orsay to a hotel near Notre Dame, a 12-minute journey [1]. The meter displayed €9.70, but the driver asked RG to pay through the car window, citing poor internet, and surreptitiously altered the amount on the card reader to €570 [1]. RG filed a fraud report with Monzo, a British online bank that reported more than 15.2 million customers as of May 2026 [2], but the bank rejected the claim, stating there was no evidence of the agreed price [1]. The scam exploits the lack of a pre-agreed fare or receipt, and because it is a face-to-face card transaction, it does not qualify for the same protections as authorised push payment fraud [1]. Debit Mastercard transactions, which draw directly from a customer’s bank account rather than a credit line [3], typically rely on voluntary chargeback schemes that require an invoice or receipt to prove a price was inflated [1]. However, Mastercard recently changed its chargeback rules so that a bank statement alone can suffice unless the vendor produces evidence that the correct sum was charged [1]. Monzo maintained its position even after RG cited the new rules. “We’re confident in our decision not to raise a chargeback because we believe it wouldn’t have been successful without the supporting evidence required,” the bank said, adding, “We urge customers to always double-check the amount before making a payment” [1]. The Guardian’s consumer affairs team disagreed, noting that the driver would need to provide evidence that the fare was correct, and advised RG to escalate the case to the Financial Ombudsman Service [1]. Other digital banking platforms, such as Revolut, which serves over 70 million customers globally and offers debit cards supporting spending in 120 currencies [4], operate in the same card network ecosystem where such chargeback disputes arise, though they were not involved in this case.