Upheld: failure to intervene in compulsive gambling spending / irresponsible account management complaint against Monzo Bank Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr O complained that Monzo Bank Ltd failed to intervene when he began spending compulsively on gambling accounts following a downturn in his mental health. Over eight weeks, Mr O deposited £100,000 into gambling accounts, with spending dramatically increasing from 23 August 2025. Monzo declined Mr O's overdraft application on 2 September 2025 specifically due to the volume of gambling transactions, but did not intervene at that point. The ombudsman upheld the complaint and accepted Monzo's offer to refund £28,012 in net gambling losses from 2 September 2025 onwards plus 8% interest, finding this fair. However, the ombudsman rejected Mr O's argument that earlier intervention from 23 August would have made a difference, finding it difficult to establish with certainty that earlier intervention would have stopped the compulsive spending given Mr O's use of multiple payment methods and intense compulsion.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Monzo should have intervened when it declined Mr O's overdraft on 2 September 2025, as this demonstrated Monzo's awareness of the compulsive gambling spending pattern. However, the ombudsman rejected Mr O's argument for an earlier intervention date of 23 August 2025, finding it difficult to establish with sufficient certainty that earlier intervention would have stopped the compulsive spending. The ombudsman noted that Mr O was using multiple payment methods (cards and faster payments) and had an intense compulsion to spend, suggesting he would likely have found alternative ways to continue spending even if earlier interventions had been made. The ombudsman accepted Monzo's offer to refund net gambling losses from 2 September 2025 onwards as fair and reasonable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website