Not upheld: failure to intervene in gambling activity and account closure complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr D complained that Revolut Ltd closed his account and failed to intervene when he developed a gambling addiction, during which he spent approximately £17,672 at online casinos between early 2019 and April 2020. Revolut closed his account in October 2020 following a review. The ombudsman found that Revolut was entitled to close the account under its terms and conditions and that there were insufficient grounds to require intervention, as there were no clear signs of financial difficulty, Mr D had not disclosed vulnerability, and his continued gambling through other providers after applying for national exclusion blocks suggested earlier intervention would not have changed his behaviour. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman concluded that Revolut was entitled to close the account under its terms and conditions and applicable legal and regulatory requirements. Regarding the gambling intervention claim, the ombudsman found insufficient evidence that Revolut should have intervened because: (1) there were no clear signs of financial difficulty in the account activity; (2) Mr D had not informed Revolut of vulnerability; (3) Mr D's continued gambling through other accounts after applying for national exclusion blocks suggested that earlier intervention by Revolut would not necessarily have changed his behaviour; and (4) Revolut is entitled to design its own monitoring systems, and with no illegitimate funds involved, there was no basis to require further checks.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website