Same applies to Wise - I don’t keep big amounts in there and just use it for transfers
Thanks @KarenLot, your example of your bad experience now explains your previous comment.
Again, it all appears to be individual accounts rather than business accounts, so the original poster can take these anecdotes for what they are.
I think there is some misinformation around “not being as safe as a bank”.
Revolut, whilst applying for a banking licence, is currently an Electronic Money Institution, which is actually as safe as a bank, as it cannot lend any of its customer deposits (i.e. no risk of loans not being repaid) and must have all deposits guaranteed by its facilitating bank.
One of the primary reasons, therefore, for the fintechs to become banks, is not for the alluded increase security of clients’ money, but in order for them to start lending. So, your comment alludes to a reason not to trust Revolut, which doesn’t seem to hold up.
Again, this isn’t necessarily relevant to the original poster, Revolut have been excellent for me and my friends, in our non-business dealings with them, I am merely trying to get some clarity on any ambiguous statements or those without sufficient backup.
1 Like
I would take issue with this, as likely would the customers of Glint which went into administration a couple of years back causing chaos for customers as… Barclays I think it was, just froze all the deposit accounts and waited for administrators to go through a rather slow process before they would release people’s funds. Yes that in one sense shows it worked well as funds were protected by the bank that held the money but a big part of FSCS protection is the guarantee that you will not just get your money back, but that they aim to do so within 7 days of registering your claim. I suspect most people in most situations could manage a week without their funds, even those of more modest means.
If you’re buying a house, have the money in Revolut and it goes under, you should get it back, but it’s all dependent on the administrator communicating with the bank who holds deposits, agreeing to do so and putting into place the process to do so, and the bank being happy that everything is above board and it’s ok to do so. This could be a few days (very unlikely), weeks, months, or if things are very complicated or involve criminal activity could even be years (but also unlikely), by which time your house you want to buy will be long gone, your savings pot for a rainy day will still be locked away when the downpour is so heavy the roof caves in… etc etc. EML holders have been very good in saying it’s ‘almost as good as FSCS protection’, and it is, but the devil is in the detail as always and that’s where they fall down.
Incidentally, it’s always worth remembering that in fact this is actually up to a million pounds if the funds are within 6 months of being deposited. You’re covered 85k for basic deposits, but as I understand it as long as you’re not keeping the money for any length of time, so for example if you sell a house, receive the proceeds, and are intending to send them on to the solicitor to purchase another, or you get an inheritance or redundancy youre keeping in one place short term before investing or such you’re not bound by that strict 85k limit.
Thanks @kirsteastevenson, this is a much better discussion on the pros and cons of EMIs vs banks, although not necessarily the safety of one’s cash but the inconvenience if they have dodgy accounting. More productive than thowing a particular company under the bus with one-liners without explaining further; and also explains your recommendation of Starling Bank for the original poster’s needs.
Thanks.
Have to say, their customer support is poor, been there. But I can also assure folk HSBC’s is even worse. 
With regards to whether they are a bank, “yes” in the EU, “work in progress” in the UK, apparently: Revolut applies for UK banking license – TechCrunch
Our accountant handles all that, I check in with her once a week but I don’t know much about it. We definitely have currency gains/losses on the P&L and it’s quite active, thanks to an account in Spain (practically obligatory if you need to pay social security), three in France (where we have incorporated as an SAS) and Revolut/PayPal shenanigans. 
1 Like
Just to be that person yet again, Revolut group have had a Lithuanian banking license for some time, but until March of this year only used it in Lithuania for Lithuanian customers who joined a new entity called Revolut Bank UAB which has the license. A few months ago they expanded the list so now customers in Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Latvia, Malta, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia can join Revolut Bank (which is separate from Revolut Payments UAB that we transact with in France) and have deposit protection and get overdrafts, loans etc. Which all sounds like I’m being very persnickety but it is important to note that unless you are in one of those specific countries and have actively chosen to join Revolut Bank (and potentially gone through enhanced KYC/AML/Credit checks) they’re not a bank even though one of the companies of the Revolut group does have a banking license which can be passported across Europe.
Phew, that was a lot of typing the word Revolut… 
1 Like
@kirsteastevenson I realise the original poster was specifically asking about a UK-based account, but as you mention other European countries, I assume regardless of which EU country, that coverage is under the European Banking Authority’s Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive?
I was notified back in October 2020 of the move of my Revolut account from the GB entity to LT. Whilst either IBAN could be used for 6 months to ease the transition, it was effective at that point in 2020. At the same time Revolut outlined that for French customers:
The great news for our French customers is that we are currently in the process of applying for a French Branch of our European entity. Once this branch is active, you’ll be able to have a local French IBAN which starts with ‘FR’.
Hasn’t happened yet but nice to see it’s on the cards (intended pun).
So, what’s not to like about Revolut?
There’s no big deal (for me anyway) having an LT IBAN. It’s a simple matter to declare the account with the fisc on cerfa 3916 and those who really, really need an FR IBAN will soon get their wish once the process is complete (after which they will need to notify the change from LT on cerfa 3916 of course but no need to advise the FR account)
all I can say is avoid Lloyds as though your sanity depends on it (which it does).
Everything has to be done in branch which would be a drag at the best of times. Nightmare when the ‘everything in branch thing’ only comes to light after you’ve moved to France and end up spending days (yes days) going from dept to dept because nobody knows what to do.
@graham
Graham, I don’t know why I feel the need to defend Revolut - they’re just another business out to make a quid or two.
Perhaps it’s all the mis-information or consistent unjustified scaremongering that gets posted about them … anyhoo … just to put paid to them not being covered by FSCS (aside from the fact that it doesn’t matter too much anyway as it is fully Safeguarded by facilitating bank).
It turns out their Savings Account (Savings Vault) is in fact FSCS protected within the UK.
I wasn’t sure if you were aware of that, and because, just like a diamond ‘a forum post is forever’ good to just add it to this thread.
1 Like
I defend Revolut as a satisfied user and do not recognise any of the complaints levied against them. Equally, I have no issues with the security of any funds I lodge with them as much as I have don’t have any concerns about the funds lodged with other UK banking products so yes, basically, we’re on the same page.
1 Like
Interesting Revolut sent out email explaining how your money is protected. I like the statement “So, provided that it [the e-money institution] is compliant with the safeguarding laws, if an e-money institution goes out of business, customers should get most, if not all, of their money back.”
One hopes they are compliant
How we keep your funds safe
Revolut is an e-money institution – here’s how it works
In February 2020, we published a blog that explained how Revolut, as an e-money institution (EMI), protects your money through “safeguarding”, and how that’s different to how your money is protected by banks in the UK. Because it is important for customers to know this difference, our regulator, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), recently wrote to all e-money institutions, asking them to remind customers that their money is protected through “safeguarding”, and not through the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).
So, here’s our reminder. It’s important to understand that, in the UK, Revolut is not a bank but an e-money institution, authorised under the UK Electronic Money Regulations. This means, in particular, that FSCS protection does not apply to the e-money or payment services we provide.
So, how is your e-money protected at Revolut?
“Safeguarding” is a set of laws that defines how an e-money institution must protect your money. These rules are designed to ensure that if the e-money institution fails, your money will have been kept in a safe place and be paid back to you. For safeguarding to protect you, the e-money institution must follow these rules. That’s why you should only use an e-money institution that you trust.
To explain in more detail: once an e-money institution receives your money, it must either place it in a dedicated “safeguarding account” with a bank, or invest it in low risk assets that have been approved by the regulator as an alternative to cash. Sometimes, less commonly, it may protect the money with an insurance policy instead. Your money must stay in these accounts or investments until you spend it.
The protection this provides means that if an e-money institution fails, there should be a pot of money (the safeguarding account) sufficient to pay all customers the money they are owed. These safeguarding accounts are protected by law from other creditors of a failed e-money institution making a claim against them. The only thing that can be paid from these safeguarding accounts, before the customers are paid back their e-money, is the cost of the receiver (the person who’s appointed to manage the closure of a failed company).
Why is safeguarding different from the FSCS protection given by banks?
When you keep money with an e-money institution, it’s safeguarded instead of having FSCS protection (sometimes called “deposit insurance”).
The main difference between FSCS protection and safeguarding is that FSCS protection is covered by an independent statutory organisation, while safeguarding protection is provided by the e-money institution itself. If a FSCS protected firm were to fail, this independent organisation is legally obliged to pay back their funds to eligible customers up to the maximum compensation amount (normally £85,000 for consumers). This will happen whether or not the FSCS protected firm actually has that money itself. This payout will normally happen within seven days.
If an e-money institution (like Revolut) fails, the customers’ claims will be paid from the safeguarding account. This is because the e-money institution cannot lend the money it has received from one person to another, so it should have enough money in its safeguarding accounts to cover its debts to its customers. Only if the institution has breached its obligations, might there not be enough money in these accounts for customers to be repaid their funds.
So, provided that it is compliant with the safeguarding laws, if an e-money institution goes out of business, customers should get most, if not all, of their money back. (Although, as explained, in some instances certain costs may be taken by the receiver of the firm.) The payout could also take longer than it would with a bank.
To be clear, the safeguarding rules only apply to your e-money. They do not apply to money you put in your Revolut Savings Vault - that money is deposited with a third party bank which holds it on your behalf and is FSCS protected. The safeguarding rules also don’t apply to cryptocurrency or commodities you purchase through the Revolut app or to any stocks you buy through our app.
How can you learn more about safeguarding?
If you want to learn more about safeguarding, you should! It’s important to know how your money is protected.
Here are some resources you might find useful:
- We give a bit more detail about how we safeguard in our terms and conditions (section 8 for Retail and section 11 for Business)
- Our blog about safeguarding is here
- The FCA’s letter to e-money institutions is here. They’ve also included a page on their website providing a bit more information for customers
- If you’re unsure of how your money with a particular company is protected, check out the FCA’s “Financial Services Register”. This is a list of the companies that the FCA regulates. It tells you what type of licence each company has and how the company protects your funds.
Thanks,
Team Revolut
1 Like
I have had 7 of these in the last 10 days, all from different emoney fintechs which made me wonder if the FCA had told them they had until the 1st July to do it and they were all now rushing to get it done 
It also made me realise I probably need to go on another account closure round since at least 2 of them I’d entirely forgotten I had
keep a note of the dates when achieved for the cerfa 3916 submission next tax round cycle…
2 Likes
Yes the FCA told them.
Otherwise I doubt many would have sent it