Not upheld: gambling transactions and account management; alleged failure to prevent gambling despite stated vulnerabilities complaint against Monzo Bank Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Miss H complained that Monzo allowed gambling transactions through her account despite her requesting restrictions and informing the bank of her vulnerabilities. Monzo enabled a gambling block on her account in May 2025, but gambling transactions continued because the merchants involved were not classified with gambling merchant category codes. The ombudsman found that Monzo acted reasonably by providing appropriate support, implementing a functioning gambling block, and explaining its limitations. The ombudsman determined that banks are not required to monitor spending patterns or intervene in authorised transactions based on customer vulnerabilities, and that Monzo could not have identified the transactions as gambling-related given the merchants' classification. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Monzo acted fairly and reasonably within the scope of its obligations. While sympathising with Miss H's gambling struggles, the ombudsman determined that Monzo provided appropriate support, the gambling block functioned as designed, and banks are not generally required to monitor or intervene in authorised transactions based on spending patterns or time of day. The transactions were not fraudulent as they were authorised by Miss H, and Monzo could not have identified them as gambling transactions because the merchants did not use gambling merchant category codes. The ombudsman rejected the argument that Monzo should have intervened based on Miss H's vulnerabilities or assessed her capacity at the time of each transaction, as this would be impractical and is not a standard banking obligation.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website