Not upheld: failure to provide appropriate support and intervention for gambling-related spending complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss F complained that Revolut Ltd failed to provide appropriate help and support to manage her gambling after she disclosed gambling issues and requested assistance in blocking payments to gambling sites. Revolut explained that Miss F could set up gambling blocks herself through the app and offered to block specific merchants on identified cards, but explained it could not unilaterally impose account-wide blocks. Miss F subsequently made approximately £2,000 in gambling transactions after blocks were lifted and new cards were ordered. The ombudsman found that Revolut provided clear explanations of its capabilities and limitations, and that it could not reasonably be expected to restrict Miss F's account access unilaterally while continuing to provide payment services. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Revolut could have shown more empathy, it was limited in the practical support it could provide while continuing to offer payment facilities. Revolut clearly explained what it could and could not do: it could not unilaterally impose blocks but could only guide customers on how to set them up themselves through the app. Revolut also explained that merchant-specific blocks would apply only to identified cards, not to future cards. The ombudsman concluded that Revolut could not reasonably be expected to restrict Miss F's account access unilaterally, and that whether to offer such features is a commercial decision for the firm. The ombudsman rejected Miss F's arguments that Revolut should have blocked payments through third-party payment service providers or that gambling blocks should have applied to future cards.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website