Not upheld: failure to prevent financial harm from gambling; failure to recover disputed payments complaint against Bank of Scotland plc, trading as Halifax

Decision detail

Summary

Mr D complained that Halifax failed to offer appropriate support when he was experiencing financial harm due to compulsive spending on an online casino, and failed to take action on disputed payments. Halifax had intervened on related payments from Mr D's current account, asking questions about his gambling and offering a gambling freeze, which Mr D declined. The ombudsman found Halifax's interventions were proportionate and that Mr D would likely have continued making the payments regardless, as he was entitled to use his account and had capacity to do so. The ombudsman also found that chargeback and section 75 remedies were not available because the payments appeared in Mr D's merchant account and he was aware of the gambling nature of the transactions. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Halifax appropriately intervened when it identified gambling-related payments from Mr D's current account, asking proportionate questions about his financial wellbeing and offering support including a gambling freeze, which Mr D declined. Regarding prevention of payments, the ombudsman concluded that even if Halifax had intervened on the credit card payments, Mr D's responses indicated he would likely have continued making the payments as he was entitled to use his account as he saw fit and there was no suggestion he lacked capacity. Regarding recovery, the ombudsman found that chargeback rights were not available because the payments did appear in Mr D's account with the merchant (he could gamble and withdraw winnings), and section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 did not apply because payments went to intermediaries and Mr D was aware of the gambling nature of the transactions.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website