Not upheld: refund of authorized gambling transactions and chargeback handling complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr T disputed multiple payments made to online gambling websites via his Revolut debit card between January and March 2025, claiming he could not withdraw winnings and that merchants masked transaction nature. Although Mr T had registered with GamStop and placed a gambling block on his account, transactions processed because merchants used incorrect Merchant Categorisation Codes. Revolut declined to refund or raise chargebacks, citing Mr T's authorization and chargeback rules excluding gambling transactions. The ombudsman upheld Revolut's position, finding all transactions were properly authorized through secure authentication and funded by Mr T's own deposits, and that chargeback rules explicitly prohibit disputes for gambling transactions. Revolut's voluntary payment of £245.67 was deemed fair resolution.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that all transactions were properly authorized through secure authentication methods and funded by Mr T's own deposits, making him liable under Payment Services Regulations 2017. The transactions were not unusual or suspicious enough to trigger intervention by Revolut. Gambling blocks have inherent limitations as they rely on merchants using correct MCCs, and the merchants in this case deliberately used incorrect codes to circumvent blocks. Chargeback rules explicitly exclude gambling transactions from dispute rights, and card schemes confirmed no chargeback codes apply for incorrect MCCs. Therefore, Revolut acted reasonably in declining chargebacks and refusing refunds.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website