Not upheld: failure to intervene on gambling spending and lack of support complaint against Revolut Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B, a gambling addict registered with GamStop since December 2023, spent over £8,000 gambling on his Revolut account between December 2024 and December 2025. He contacted Revolut on 14 October 2025 seeking chargebacks and disclosed his GamStop registration. Revolut provided information about its gambling block in its final response on 24 November 2025 and refunded £325 as a goodwill gesture. Mr B complained that Revolut failed to intervene earlier despite the gambling spending. The ombudsman found that Revolut could not have identified the gambling problem from account activity alone, and that even if it had intervened earlier, Mr B would not have stopped gambling entirely, as he continued gambling on another bank account after the Revolut block was applied in December 2025. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Revolut could not have known about Mr B's gambling problem before he disclosed it on 14 October 2025, as the transaction patterns (small amounts of £10-£20) would not have alerted the firm to unusual spending. While the ombudsman acknowledged it was arguable that Revolut should have provided information about its gambling block immediately upon learning of the GamStop registration on 14 October, rather than waiting until 24 November, the key issue was whether earlier intervention would have prevented gambling losses. The ombudsman concluded it would not have, as Mr B had been registered with GamStop since December 2023 but continued gambling, and after the Revolut block was applied in December 2025, he simply moved his gambling activity to another bank account within weeks. Therefore, no compensation for gambling losses was warranted.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website