> Despite Liz’s insistence that she’d been asleep when the payments were made, both banks concluded that Liz had authorised the transactions herself, from her o

> Despite Liz’s insistence that she’d been asleep when the payments were made, both banks concluded that Liz had authorised the transactions herself, from her own device, meaning she wouldn’t be refunded. > With Liz’s permission, Rip Off Britain sent her device to a cybersecurity firm for investigation. Pen Test Partners concluded ‘with high confidence’ that the malicious app was linked to or responsible for the fraudulent activity on the device. > After Rip Off Britain shared Pen Test Partners’ report with Liz’s banks, [the bank] refunded her in full. Is this process repeatable by others? When the bank refuses to cooperate with you and insists you authorized payments that you didn't, can you send your devices to a third party to inspect? Would banks then be legally required to undo the unauthorized transactions when presented with evidence? Or was this just a "one time exception" due to the media attention of the story?