Bank acted reasonably in response to request for help with gambling addiction

Categories:

Advice & information, Instructions not followed, Cards, Bank decisions,

Summary:

Bobby used his debit card to pay for an online gambling addiction. In July 2025, he asked the bank to prevent him from being able to order new debit cards to help curb his addiction. The bank said its systems did not allow it to accommodate his request. Bobby switched to a bank that could offer this restriction. He complained that the bank should have done more to support him and sought reimbursement for half of his recent gambling losses.

Published:

January 2026

Our investigation

We considered the bank had acted reasonably when Bobby told it about his gambling addiction. Banks generally do not have a duty to prevent customers from making unwise financial decisions, although they must act reasonably if a vulnerable customer asks for extra support. When Bobby first told the bank about his addiction in April 2024 and asked it to put a block on the use of his card on gambling sites, it did as he asked and also offered some other support options. Its systems were unable to accommodate his subsequent request to apply the same block straightaway to other cards he might obtain in the future. However, it did explain to him other ways to support him in overcoming his addiction, none of which he considered adequate or a substitute for a block on any future cards he might get. Nonetheless, the bank communicated the limitations of what it could do and other support options available to him in line with its obligations.

However, we recommended the bank review its gambling block, and as a result the bank changed its processes to ensure the gambling block transferred to new cards.