Upheld: account closure and poor communication/conflicting information complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained that Revolut closed his account without proper explanation and provided conflicting information. Revolut had identified that Mr M had three previous accounts with them, all of which had been closed, and closed his new account in April 2025 based on this history and its terms and conditions. The ombudsman found the account closure itself was fair and within Revolut's rights, and that Revolut was not obliged to provide detailed reasons for the closure. However, the ombudsman upheld the complaint because Revolut initially told Mr M he could not open another account and then later said he could, causing confusion. The ombudsman awarded £50 compensation for this conflicting communication and the resulting distress, rejecting Mr M's request for higher compensation and his concerns about algorithmic decision-making.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Revolut was entitled to close Mr M's account based on its terms and conditions, which permit closure when a customer has previously had accounts closed because they fell outside the firm's risk appetite. However, the ombudsman found that Revolut provided conflicting information to Mr M about whether he could open another account, first saying he could not and then saying he could. This conflicting communication caused Mr M confusion and distress. While Revolut was not obliged to provide detailed reasons for the account closure, it should have communicated more clearly about Mr M's ability to open a future account. The ombudsman rejected Mr M's request for more detailed explanation of the closure decision and his concerns about algorithms, noting these are matters for regulators rather than the ombudsman.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website