Edited By
Liam O'Connor
Swiss businesses are raising alarm after a recent incident involving Revolut, where a CHF 5,000 payment was rejected and remains untraceable. Users express frustration over unhelpful responses after opening multiple support tickets.
On March 28, 2025, a Swiss business transferred CHF 5,000 to its Revolut account. Subsequently, Revolut rejected the payment, claiming it was "reverted." Despite the issuance of an MT103 documentโoften used for tracing fundsโno evidence of the funds has emerged. The business's bank conducted an extensive search, but to no avail.
The company has opened over 10 support tickets with Revolut, only to receive repetitive messages:
"One moment, weโre analyzing this"
"Could you send us some screenshots?"
"We need a confirmation from your bank."
"It honestly feels like a loop designed to wear you down."
Amid these exchanges, users note the issue of $5,000 isn't trivial. The expectation was for a fintech bank to proficiently handle such matters.
The Swiss business has requested Revolut to either re-execute the return or specify the correspondent bank involved, yet real solutions have not materialized. Frustration among users is evident as they contemplate escalating the matter to the Bank of Lithuania.
Curiously, many people on forums are echoing similar experiences:
"Some humans would be nice," lamented a user regarding the lack of personal interaction.
Others voiced doubt about the effectiveness of Revolut's support system.
Key Insights:
๐ Repeated Communication Issues: Users report getting the same automated responses.
๐ Lack of Accountability: Revolut hasnโt specified where the funds might be.
๐ Growing Frustration: The sentiment among users leans negative as they hope for a resolution.
Thereโs a strong chance that Revolut may face mounting pressure to enhance its customer support infrastructure as frustrations rise among Swiss businesses. Experts estimate that if this situation persists without resolution, up to 40% of affected users could consider switching to alternative fintech providers. Furthermore, the possibility of regulatory oversight from the Bank of Lithuania looms, potentially forcing Revolut to clarify its payment processes. As users continue to speak out, we might see more organized efforts to demand accountability, leading to increased scrutiny of fintech practices in Switzerland and beyond.
In the late 19th century, the introduction of the telegraph brought not just speed but also confusion in banking. Many businesses found themselves grappling with payment errors that went unresolved for lengthy periods, leading to a crisis of trust. Just as then, the current Revolut debacle may prompt users to rethink their dependency on digital transactions. As history shows, technological advancements often come with growing pains, forcing both consumers and companies to adjust their expectations and adapt to new realities. Just like the telegraph era, this moment could act as a catalyst for industry-wide change in how digital payments are managed.