Santander Ombudsman Ruling Reveals Gaps in Blocking Payments to Offshore Gambling Sites
The Financial Ombudsman Service ordered Santander to refund Mr R's net gambling losses from 15 August-17 September 2025, plus 8% interest and £500 compensation, after he disclosed a severe addiction. Current UK bank blocks only target licensed operators and fail against offshore sites. The case questions the balance between bank liability and customer responsibility.
SCCG Take — This ruling exposes the practical limits of payment blocks against offshore gambling and increases pressure on banks to close enforcement gaps for vulnerable customers.
The Financial Ombudsman Service has ordered Santander to refund all identifiable gambling losses minus winnings incurred by customer Mr R between 15 August and 17 September 2025. Mr R had received £25,000 from a house sale and spent most of it on gambling despite blocks with the bank. The order also requires 8% interest on each transaction in that period plus £500 compensation for distress and inconvenience.
Losses of £16,000 incurred before 15 August are excluded. That was the date Mr R disclosed a severe gambling addiction to Santander. The bank had no basis to intervene prior to disclosure, and the ombudsman held Mr R responsible for setting his own restrictions before that point.
As reported by SBC News, the case highlights the challenge UK banks face with offshore gambling transactions.
Shortcomings of UK Bank Gambling Blocks
Every major UK bank offers gambling payment blocks. These services, introduced by Starling and Monzo in 2018 and by Santander in mid-2019, should prevent payments to any licensed gambling business. The blocks were encouraged by the Gambling Commission and GambleAware as an additional consumer protection layer.
Blocks apply only to operators licensed and regulated by the Gambling Commission. They do not cover the many offshore casinos and sportsbooks accessible from the UK. Mr R transacted exclusively with offshore companies, and even an international block set by Santander failed to stop the activity. This reflects the unlicensed .com sector's reach.
The ruling follows Gambling Commission data showing that individuals with a Problem Gambling Severity Index score of eight or more are most likely to gamble with offshore platforms. No further guidance on gambling blocks has been published since 2022. Researchers have urged the Financial Conduct Authority to impose consistent standards, including a minimum 48-hour cooling-off period, but the FCA has not done so.
Where Responsibility Lies
Santander argued that Mr R bore responsibility for choosing to transact with offshore platforms. The ombudsman disagreed. The blocking system exists to protect vulnerable customers like Mr R, making bank intervention necessary once the addiction was known.
The decision leaves open how individual responsibility should factor into cases of gambling harm when safeguards prove ineffective against offshore operators.
Gaming, betting and prediction markets — the desk’s read, every weekday.
Subscribe →