A recent ruling by the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) regarding Revolut has shone a spotlight on the links between cryptocurrency and gambling in the UK.
The ruling comes at a time of regulatory change for both the crypto and gambling sectors, with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) moving into the final stage of its consultation on the latter.
The convergence between gambling and cryptocurrency, and the role financial institutions play in interacting with the sector and preventing problem gambling and criminal activities has not been addressed by the review of the Gambling Act 2005.
Mr H’s Revolut refund
Cryptocurrency is at the heart of the FOS’ ruling around Revolut. The ombudsman concluded that the fintech and challenger bank should refund a customer £400 after said customer purchased crypto via the app which he subsequently used to gamble.
The customer, known only as Mr H in the FOS’ documents, was a gambling addict according to the ombudsman.
He contacted Revolut between May-July 2025 asking whether the crypto conversion feature on its platform could be removed, or if he could be blocked from using it, and eventually requested for his account to be permanently removed as a possible solution.
Like various other banks and fintechs, Revolut offers a gambling block feature which customers can use to ban themselves from making transactions to any online betting or casino platforms – but the FOS feels that the company could have done more to assist Mr H.
Caroline Davies, the FOS Ombudsman who wrote the ruling statement, remarked that the FOS cannot order companies like Revolut to review their own systems – this would be the responsibility of the FCA.
However, she did observe that Mr H experienced a ‘poor customer journey aggravated by Revolut not getting to grips with the issues’. Davies added that “I am at a loss as to why Revolut couldn’t take the decision itself to close Mr H’s account permanently when it has the ability to do this and Mr H had requested that as a possible solution”.
An FOS statement to SBC News read: “When gambling becomes an uncontrollable habit or addiction it can cause huge harm not just to an individual, but also to those around them, negatively impacting mental and physical health, relationships and finances.
“People should contact our service if they feel a financial provider could have done more to protect them from the harmful effects of gambling, we’ll then investigate their complaint.
“We look at each case on its own individual merits by weighing up the evidence and considering all the relevant laws and regulations. Our service is free, easy to use and impartial – if we find someone has been treated unfairly, we expect firms to act promptly and put things right for the consumer.”
Banking and betting
The connection between gambling and banking is fairly obvious – banks enable the financial transactions between customers and the betting and casino websites they wish to bet on sports with or play games on.
This has led to some examination of what financial institutions can do to help prevent problem gambling. Monzo, Santander, and the aforementioned Revolut, all offer gambling transaction blocking features on their platforms. A number of Irish banks do the same.
In Revolut’s case, the company has been offering a gambling block since April 2020. The feature was introduced at the same time as new UK Gambling Commission (UKGC) rules banning operators from accepting credit card payments, which payments providers like Revolut had to adjust to.
“At Revolut, protecting our customers is our highest priority,” a Revolut statement following the Ombudsman ruling read. “We provide all our UK customers with a gambling block feature.
“When enabled, this tool automatically blocks card payments that are identified as being for gambling. We strongly encourage any customers with concerns about gambling to activate this feature in their app.”
WD Stock Photos / Shutterstock
Although Revolut may have experienced some bad publicity around this particular case involving Mr H, the gambling block features it and other banks employ have been noted by the FCA.
The regulator’s guidance on financially vulnerable customers, for example, cites cases of optional blocks on gambling transactions as examples of inclusive design of financial products, of banks considering the needs of vulnerable customers and empowering customers with gambling problems to take more control.
In a statement sent to SBC News, the FCA said: “Problem gambling causes significant financial hardship. There are free money and gambling advice services available to support people who are struggling.
“Under our Consumer Duty firms must do right by their customers, especially those in vulnerable circumstances. We’ve guided firms on how they can support those with gambling problems, including restricting certain types of payments.”
The other element to consider in the case of Mr H, however, is one with much wider ramifications across the UK gambling and finance industries – cryptocurrency.
Crypto and casinos
Cryptocurrency regulations are, as mentioned above, under development in the UK. The FCA moved into the final phase of its consultation around crypto regulations on Friday, seeking feedback on 10 proposed rules.
The regulator said at the time that it wants to see an ‘open, sustainable and competitive crypto market’ which consumers can trust and in which risks can be easily understood by prospective crypto users and investors.
“It’s clear policymakers want this comprehensive regulatory regime to act as a bedrock for a thriving and competitive cryptoasset business ecosystem in the UK,” said Nick Jones, CEO and Founder of Zumo, a London-based fintech with a focus on digital assets.
“As the FCA enters the final phase of its consultation and gathers feedback on applying Consumer Duty to crypto firms, credit must be given to the regulator for taking industry views on board, where they’ve been given.”
The FCA’s activity falls in line with the ambitions of HM Treasury to create a sustainable crypto market in the UK, as the Labour government presses ahead with its goals of economic growth – while facing mounting political pressure from its parliamentary rivals.
The Treasury is planning to bring ‘firm and proportionate rules’ around crypto assets into effect from 2027, with the aim of giving greater legal clarity to the sector. This includes a requirement for crypto firms to be regulated by the FCA.
“Bringing crypto into the regulatory perimeter is a crucial step in securing the UK’s position as a world leading financial centre in the digital age,” said Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer.
So, how does this affect gambling? While this is purely speculative from the author’s point of view, the fact Mr H was making gambling payments with crypto suggests that he was likely not betting with regulated gaming firms.
This is for the simple reason that crypto betting is not legal in Britain. A worrying trend in recent years has been the rise of non-Gamstop casinos, many of which accept crypto as a form of payment to help mask where transactions have come from and where they are heading.
“No company licensed by us is offering gambling with cryptocurrency in Britain,” a Gambling Commission spokesperson told SBC News.
“Any site that does is an illegal, overseas operator often run by criminal networks intent on scamming British consumers outside of the regulatory protections that we require legitimate gambling companies to provide.
“Government has recently announced that we are being given additional resources and legal powers to tackle the illegal market. This will allow us to further expand our extensive programme of action against these criminals that in the last year alone has led to 627 websites being blocked and over 200,000 URLs being removed.”
In this writer’s view, there is a strong possibility that Mr H was betting with a non-regulated, non-Gamstop casino using crypto. This also means that there is also a strong possibility that Mr H was already self-excluded from the regulated industry, something which could be backed up further by the Ombudsman’s description of the individual as a problem gambler.
As UK crypto regulations develop, a possible solution to this would be bringing crypto betting into the regulated market – though this would come with many new challenges, particularly with regulating and monitoring a technology which counts autonomy and anonymity as core values.
The UKGC has shown a strong willingness to fight the black market also, as seen by the statement above. The regulator is also becoming increasingly vocal on wanting to see other sectors and companies outside gambling take on more responsibilities, like Meta, and so we could expect to see further collaborations with the fintech sector going forward.