Revolut accepts liability for direct losses caused by its own failures, but not for losses caused by unforeseeable events outside its control or where Revolut was required to act by law.
This analysis describes what Revolut's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
The force majeure and legal compliance carve-outs mean Revolut may not compensate you if your account is restricted or a payment fails due to regulatory requirements, even if you suffer a financial loss as a result.
Interpretive note: The enforceability of specific liability exclusions depends on their interaction with mandatory PSR 2017 provisions and Consumer Rights Act 2015 fairness standards, which may vary by claim type and jurisdiction.
If Revolut blocks a payment or restricts your account because of a legal obligation (such as an AML freeze), any resulting financial loss is excluded from Revolut's liability, even if the restriction later proves to have been unwarranted.
How other platforms handle this
To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, Kit shall not be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, consequential or punitive damages, or any loss of profits or revenues, whether incurred directly or indirectly, or any loss of data, use, goodwill, or other intangible losses, resulting ...
To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, Pinterest shall not be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, consequential, or punitive damages, or any loss of profits or revenues, whether incurred directly or indirectly, or any loss of data, use, goodwill, or other intangible losses, res...
You will remain responsible for any amounts you fail to pay in connection with your subscription, including collection costs, bank overdraft fees, collection agency fees, reasonable attorneys' fees, and arbitration or court costs.
Monitoring
Revolut has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"We are responsible for losses you suffer as a direct result of our failure to meet our obligations under this Agreement, unless those losses are the result of unusual or unforeseeable events that are outside our control and that we could not have avoided even with all due care, or those losses are caused by us following the law.— Excerpt from Revolut's Revolut Terms of Service
REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: This provision engages the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (now incorporated into the Consumer Rights Act 2015) and the FCA's Consumer Duty, both of which limit the enforceability of limitation of liability clauses against consumers. The Payment Services Regulations 2017 also set mandatory liability standards for payment service providers that cannot be contracted out of by agreement. The tension is that while this clause attempts to limit liability, UK consumer protection law and PSR 2017 may render some limitations unenforceable. GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: Medium. Liability limitation clauses in consumer contracts are subject to a fairness test under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Clauses that purport to exclude liability where the law mandates coverage (e.g. PSR 2017 liability for unauthorised transactions) may be unenforceable. The FCA's Consumer Duty further requires that firms do not impose unfair terms that harm consumer outcomes. JURISDICTION FLAGS: The Consumer Rights Act 2015 and PSR 2017 create a mandatory floor of liability protection for UK consumers that contractual terms cannot override. EU/EEA customers benefit from PSD2 equivalent protections. The legal compliance carve-out is particularly broad and may be used to justify a wide range of actions that result in consumer detriment. CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: The liability limitations should be assessed against the mandatory liability standards in PSR 2017 (e.g. liability for unauthorised payment transactions) to ensure the contractual terms do not assert exclusions that would be unenforceable under the applicable regulatory framework. Any B2B contract with Revolut should assess whether business customers have different liability exposure. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should map the liability limitation provisions against PSR 2017 mandatory liability provisions and Consumer Rights Act 2015 fairness requirements. Where the contractual terms purport to limit liability in ways that conflict with these mandatory standards, those limitations may be unenforceable and should not be relied upon operationally.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
The force majeure and legal compliance carve-outs mean Revolut may not compensate you if your account is restricted or a payment fails due to regulatory requirements, even if you suffer a financial loss as a result.
If Revolut blocks a payment or restricts your account because of a legal obligation (such as an AML freeze), any resulting financial loss is excluded from Revolut's liability, even if the restriction later proves to have been unwarranted.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Revolut.