If you have a dispute with Revolut, you must resolve it through private arbitration rather than going to court, and you cannot join a class action lawsuit with other customers.
This is a material shift from previous dispute resolution terms, replacing traditional litigation rights with mandatory arbitration and eliminating class action remedies, significantly limiting user legal remedies.
View full change record →Consumers lose the right to pursue claims in court or as part of a class action, meaning individual arbitration through JAMS is the sole remedy for disputes with Revolut, which can be costly and impractical for small-value claims.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Mandatory Individual Arbitration and Class Action Waiver and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →This clause prevents you from suing Revolut in court and from joining with other affected customers in a class action — which is often the only practical way to hold a company accountable for small-value widespread harms.
(1) REGULATORY FRAMEWORK: The arbitration clause implicates the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA, 9 U.S.C. §§1-16) which generally enforces such provisions. The CFPB's 2017 arbitration rule (12 CFR Part 1040), which would have restricted class action waivers in consumer financial contracts, was repealed by Congress under the Congressional Review Act. State-law challenges remain possible under unconscionability doctrine (e.g., California Civil Code §1670.5). The CFPB retains supervisory authority over arbitration practices under Dodd-Frank Act §1028. (2)
Compliance intelligence locked
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Watcher: regulatory citations. Professional: full compliance memo.