Not upheld: failure to protect vulnerable customer from compulsive spending; inadequate intervention despite knowledge of gambling and spending problems complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest)

Decision detail

Summary

Miss G complained that NatWest failed to adequately support her with compulsive spending despite being aware of her gambling problem and vulnerability. Miss G had disclosed her gambling and spending issues to NatWest, was registered with GamCare, and made escalating cash withdrawals and card payments, many to competition sites. NatWest reduced her contactless limit to £45, informed her of gambling blocks and external support, and had a specialist team contact her about her withdrawals. The ombudsman found that while NatWest was aware of Miss G's vulnerabilities, her compulsion to spend was so severe that additional interventions would not have stopped her, as she had already circumvented existing protections and been untruthful when challenged. The complaint was not upheld and no refund was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman acknowledged Miss G's vulnerabilities and distressing circumstances but concluded that NatWest could not reasonably have prevented her compulsive spending through additional interventions. The ombudsman found that Miss G's compulsion to spend was so severe that even if NatWest had blocked transactions, she would have circumvented protections by accessing cash in branch or using alternative methods. The ombudsman noted that Miss G had already circumvented existing protections (GamCare, reduced contactless limits) and had not been truthful when challenged about her spending, suggesting further interventions would have been ineffective.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website