Mad regulation?

I can think of a few ways to get round this instantly. Revolut topups, Curve, even just withdrawing cash with your credit card and depositing it!

How is this going to help?


At least it’s another barrier for the gamblers. Only the determined gamblers will jump loops of using Revolut and Curve etc.


Borrowing to gamble should be stopped not sure why anyone would think it’s a bad idea.

You should only gamble what you can afford to lose, if you are using a credit card can you afford to lose it is the thinking in the change and it’s a good change.


I suppose it’s a bit of a barrier to those who aren’t gamblers already, but this will not stop hardcore addicts at all

The point is that, once you’ve borrowed, there’s not really a way to stop the money being used for certain things.

I think a gambling cryptocurrency that you have to apply for like a loan with your annual income and affordability criteria would be an investing experiment.

I’d say it’s right to put this kind of barrier between potentially problem gamblers and being able to bet with (expensively) borrowed money.

Can it be defeated, sure - but it creates friction.


That’s right, but your credit card should not allow you to gamble money that is not yours. I really can’t see why people have an issue with that.


No issue per se, just that it’s not nearly enough.

While I think those with a gambling problem should be offered all the help they need, what that news article doesn’t mention is the effect gambling debt has on the family and friends of problem gamblers.

These people deserve protection too so any friction is a good thing when it comes to borrowing money for gambling.

In my opinion the credit card industry should have stopped this on their own without regulation, but I guess those cash transaction fees are just too attractive.


It’s only attractive for those families that barely make ends meet at the end of the day - the ones that can’t afford it end up being an extreme waste

Credit cards don’t make money on chasing debt for years, they make money on people who can just afford the debt repayments

Whilst we’re on about gambling, Starling never did sort their shitty version of a gambling block. I remember the feedback of just being able to switch it off and crack on gambling and they expressly said they were working on adding more friction and that was v.1 and would be improved. Never happened. Half arsed feature.


The Lloyds Banking Group gambling block seems quite good. You have to call them to get it turned off and then they say they will turn it off 48 - 68 hours later so you have chance to change your mind.

The ambiguous 48 - 68 hours is quite good as it immediately gives the impression you shouldn’t rely on having the facility at any particular time in the future which in itself might be a deterrent to even bother requesting to have it turned off.


What? Your credit card limit should be based on what you’ll be able to repay so, by definition whatever is your credit card limit you can afford to lose it

The whole point of a general purpose credit card and the reason it has such high interest rates is that you can do whatever you want with your credit limit

Since when do credit cards work like that ?

They never assess you when they increase the credit they offer you, so actually have no idea that you can afford to repay the amount they give you in credit. It’s based purely on your last few months use of the card, they have no idea if you have maxed out 10 other cards in that time.

You are on about the initial credit limit which is based on what you can repay, all others are not. Unless of course you have a credit card with a company that reassess you each credit increase, which I’m not aware of any in the UK doing.

1 Like

Honestly, don’t know about the details of credit cards in the UK but maybe you should fix that instead then? Here in Portugal the credit limit is mutually agreed, meaning that it is only as much as you can comfortably pay back based on your income, you can request it to be lower than that and there are only increases if your income increases proportionally and you agree to said increase.

Given that, you are free to do as you please with your credit limit, even go to an ATM and take it all out at once

How is randomly increasing credit limits based on basically nothing responsible lending?

1 Like

It’s based on how you cope with credit

For instance I have a very low income on paper but I have student loan money and some more from elsewhere. I can spend this money and it is consistent, but I’m unable to declare it as income (although I have declared it as income once I believe because I read on a website HSBC considered it as such, which has probably flagged something on my account somewhere lol)

But yeah - I can afford to repay more than my income would suggest, so upon managing my account nicely for 6 months American Express increased my limit by 50%, without an issue. It can see I’m responsible to manage my money in an affordable manner and that rather than max out my cards, I’d save for big spends and then spend and pay it off without any problems

It is responsible to use all information you have available to give access to credit - it helps people out with increased cash flow and protections granted by credit

1 Like

It’s not as bad as you might think people have made it sound :slight_smile:

Lenders can see how much credit you have across all your cards and other loans by checking with credit reference agencies. They then decide how much they think you can reasonably repay and offer you a credit limit. You can request the limit to be lower if you prefer that.

You can refuse automatic credit limit increases so they never happen.

As @Recchan said, they are also aware of people who save up for things they want to buy (travel/holidays for example) and as long as you use the account responsibly they will let you have a higher limit.


@Recchan @dave.b I understand the idea of saving and spending more than your regular income would account for, though if you have the money what’s the point of using a credit card at all?

It’s a symptom of a culture addicted to credit, which is the problem measures such as this intend to tackle to a greater or lesser extent. The idea that one uses a credit card to pay for things one could pay with its own money to begin with is a perversion of the purpose a credit card should serve

The root problem measures such as this purportedly want to solve is the fact that in the UK and other places there’s an advantage either real or perceived that using credit is better. That’s the real problem behind all this

1 Like

As I mentioned in my original message, protections. Section 75 means anything from £100 to £30,000 is covered through regulation meaning the credit card company isn’t going to just half-arsedly fight for a chargeback. They are legally obligated to refund me and not doing so is unlawful and will have the regulator breathing down their necks.

Possibly, but I would say credit is very useful. I don’t even carry a debit card with me aside from one to pay cash into my account with :slight_smile:

See my comment about protections

On top of that, does Portugal not have rewards credit cards? For every £1 I spend I get 3 points at Marriott, at £15,000 spend I get gold status there

For every £1 on my British Airways Credit Card I get 1 Avios and I get a companion ticket when I spend £20,000

So it’s not like “haha use for the sake of using it!”. They provide benefits and I’d rather get something than nothing

Perhaps the continental Europeans are just happy being screwed, rather than us being addicted to credit?

As I’ve mentioned there’s multiple advantages of using credit, points, cashback, section 75 protection

It is objectively better if you apply for the right cards. I don’t see taking advantage of money I had and was going to spend anyways as a problem :thinking:

You seem to have missed the point of my last comment. I know what the advantages are in the UK of using credit cards and I don’t condemn anyone for taking advantage of it. I was, however, precisely pointing out that those advantages should be extended to all payments, debit or credit if the root issue being tackled is excessive use of credit cards by people.

Why am I being screwed if I get all the same protections and benefits whether I use debit or credit? In abstract, the idea of borrowing money to then pay it back when I could have simply used my money directly to begin with doesn’t make any sense

1 Like