Casinos That Accept Klarna UK 2026: What You Actually Need to Know

Casinos that accept Klarna in the UK are few and far between, and the reasons are structural rather than cosmetic. Klarna operates as a buy-now-pay-later provider first and a payment processor second, and the UK Gambling Commission has spent the last several years tightening the rules around exactly that kind of arrangement. This guide covers what Klarna actually is, why most gambling sites have quietly dropped it, which regulated operators still list it in their cashier, and what the alternatives look like if you want to deposit and withdraw without handing your card details to every operator on the internet.

Before anything else: the Gambling Commission’s licence conditions require operators to offer only payment methods that can be verified as belonging to the player, processed through accounts in the player’s own name, and funded without reliance on credit. Klarna’s core BNPL product fails that test outright. Its alternative — the “pay now” card option — can pass, but most operators have decided the compliance overhead isn’t worth it. That single sentence explains most of what follows.

What Klarna Is and Why It Shows Up in Casino Cashiers at All

Klarna started in Stockholm in 2005 and now processes payments across roughly 26 markets, handling tens of millions of transactions a month. Its headline product is the pay-in-four instalment plan: you buy something for £200, pay £50 today, and the rest across three further fortnightly instalments, interest-free provided you pay on time. Late fees apply, credit checks may run in the background, and the arrangement sits on your credit file in ways that surprise people who assume “interest-free” means “invisible to lenders.”

The BNPL model exploded in popularity because it decouples spending power from income in the short term. For retail — sofas, trainers, holidays — that’s a consumer convenience with a documented risk profile. For gambling, it’s a regulatory red flag the size of a stadium. The Gambling Commission identified BNPL-funded gambling as a harm vector in its 2023 review of payment methods, and the subsequent Financial Conduct Authority oversight of BNPL products under the Consumer Credit Act amendments has made operators even more cautious. A payment method that lets someone spend money they don’t have, on an activity with a built-in house edge, is not something a licensed operator wants to explain to a compliance officer.

That said, Klarna isn’t only BNPL. The company also offers a direct card product — essentially a virtual or physical card funded from your bank account, usable anywhere a normal debit card works — and a “pay now” option where the full amount is charged upfront. These products don’t involve credit at all. They’re functionally equivalent to a debit card with extra steps, and from a regulatory standpoint they’re far less problematic. The complication is that operators don’t always distinguish between Klarna’s products in their cashier, and players don’t either. A deposit “via Klarna” might be a straightforward bank transfer or it might be a BNPL arrangement, and the T&Cs rarely spell out which.

Why does Klarna appear in casino cashiers at all, then? Two reasons. First, operators chasing market share in continental Europe picked it up because it’s ubiquitous in Sweden, Germany, and the Netherlands, where Klarna penetration among 18-to-35-year-olds runs high. Second, it functions as a middle layer between the player’s bank and the operator, which appeals to people who don’t want their bank statement to read like a gambling diary. That privacy angle is legitimate but limited — the operator still sees your identity, and the Gambling Commission’s licence conditions require it to.

The UK Regulatory Position on Klarna and Gambling Payments

The Gambling Commission’s stance on payment methods in UK-licensed casinos is governed by three overlapping layers: the Licence Conditions and Codes of Practice (LCCP), the Proceeds of Crime Act obligations around source-of-funds verification, and the Consumer Duty requirements inherited from the FCA’s financial services framework. Together, they create a compliance environment where any payment method that touches credit, instalments, or third-party funding is treated with suspicion by default.

LCCP condition 5.1.1 requires that all transactions be conducted through payment accounts in the customer’s own name. This is aimed at money laundering, but it has a side effect: BNPL products funded by credit lines don’t straightforwardly satisfy it. Condition 5.1.2 requires operators to permit withdrawals to the same method used for deposits wherever possible, which creates friction with payment aggregators that can’t process refunds. And the Commission’s 2023 guidance on “financial vulnerability” explicitly flagged gambling funded by credit as a harm indicator that operators must monitor and, in some cases, block.

The FCA’s regulation of BNPL — which came into sharper focus after the 2023 Consumer Credit Act amendments and the Treasury’s subsequent rulemaking — means Klarna itself now faces obligations around affordability checks, cooling-off periods, and late-fee transparency. But those obligations regulate Klarna’s relationship with the consumer, not the operator’s acceptance of the payment. An operator accepting a Klarna-funded deposit is effectively accepting a credit-funded transaction, and that’s where the LCCP conflict arises. The operator would need to run its own affordability assessment on top of Klarna’s, which almost none of them have built.

Practical consequence: UK-licensed operators that once listed Klarna have removed it from their cashiers, and the ones that haven’t are generally offering only the “pay now” or direct card variant, which is a debit-equivalent product. If you’re on a UK site and see Klarna in the payment list, check the fine print — nine times out of ten it’s the pay-now option, not BNPL. And if it genuinely is BNPL, that operator has a compliance question to answer.

Casinos That Accept Klarna UK 2026: The Operators Worth Looking At

The list below covers operators currently presented on the UK market. These are not recommendations in the marketing sense — they’re a factual snapshot of who’s out there, what category they sit in, and what the typical terms look like. Bonus figures, withdrawal times, and minimum deposits are described as typical for the category rather than as verified specifics for each brand, because those terms change quarterly and this page isn’t a live feed.

Operator	Category	Typical welcome bonus	Typical withdrawal time	Typical min. deposit	What sets them apart
Lottomart	Lottery-focused with casino games	Matched deposit in the 100–200% range	1–3 working days	£5–£10	Lottery betting alongside slots and table games
Sky Bet	Betting-led with casino products	Free bets or matched stake on qualifying deposit	Same day to 2 working days	£5	Deep integration with Sky’s broadcasting ecosystem
Betfair	Exchange and sportsbook with casino	Matched deposit, typically 100%	Same day via most e-wallets	£5–£10	Betting exchange model — you play against other punters, not the house
JackpotJoy	Casino and bingo	Matched deposit or free spins package	1–3 working days	£10	Bingo rooms alongside slots; strong community features
Pub Casino	Casino-focused	Matched deposit in the 100% range	1–2 working days	£10	Smaller operator with a curated game selection
Gala Bingo	Bingo and casino	Matched deposit or bingo tickets package	1–3 working days	£10	Established bingo brand with casino crossover
Coral	Betting and casino	Matched deposit or free bets on qualifying stake	Same day to 2 working days	£5–£10	High-street presence; broad product range
William Hill	Betting and casino	Matched deposit, typically 100%	Same day to 3 working days	£5–£10	One of the oldest names in UK betting; extensive retail estate
bwin	Sportsbook with casino	Matched deposit in the 100% range	1–3 working days	£5–£10	Strong continental European presence; broad sports coverage
Paddy Power	Betting and casino	Matched deposit or free bets on qualifying deposit	Same day to 2 working days	£5	Known for provocative marketing; wide product range including live casino

Read that table with the right expectations. “Typical” means exactly that — the median terms for the category, not a promise about any individual brand on a given Tuesday. Operators rotate welcome offers constantly, and the difference between a “100% up to £100” headline and the actual credited amount often comes down to wagering requirements, game weightings, and maximum-bet rules that the marketing page buries in the fourth click. The table tells you what category each operator sits in and roughly where the floor and ceiling of their terms sit. It doesn’t tell you what you’ll actually get today, because that information has a shelf life measured in weeks.

One pattern worth noting across the list: the betting-led operators — Sky Bet, Betfair, Coral, William Hill, Paddy Power — tend to process withdrawals faster than the casino-and-bingo specialists. That’s not coincidence. Betting products generate higher transaction volumes and thinner margins per transaction, which pushes those operators toward payment infrastructure that prioritises speed. Casino-focused operators, where the house edge is the business model, can afford slower payouts because player urgency works in their favour. If withdrawal speed is your primary criterion, the sportsbook-derived brands are structurally more likely to deliver.

How Klarna Deposits Work When They’re Available

When a UK operator does list Klarna, the deposit flow follows a predictable pattern. You select Klarna at the cashier, enter the amount, and are redirected to Klarna’s own interface — either the app or a hosted web page. Klarna authenticates you, confirms the payment source (your bank account via open banking, or a linked card), and returns you to the operator with a confirmation. The whole process typically takes under two minutes if you already have a Klarna account and under five if you’re creating one mid-deposit.

The deposit itself is usually instant from the operator’s perspective. The funds appear in your casino balance immediately, because Klarna settles with the merchant on the transaction date rather than waiting for the customer’s instalment schedule to complete. That’s the BNPL model in a nutshell: the merchant gets paid, the customer pays Klarna, and the credit risk sits entirely with Klarna. It’s also why operators liked it — instant crediting with no chargeback exposure on the merchant side.

Withdrawals to Klarna are a different animal. Klarna’s pay-in-four product doesn’t support refunds to the original payment method in the way a debit card does, and operators are required under LCCP 5.1.2 to return funds to the deposit method where feasible. Where Klarna can’t process the refund, the operator must offer an alternative — usually a bank transfer to the account verified in your name. This adds a step, introduces a delay, and in some cases triggers additional identity verification because the operator needs to confirm the receiving account belongs to you. Budget an extra one to three working days for a Klarna withdrawal compared with a debit card or e-wallet withdrawal.

Fee structures around Klarna deposits vary by operator. Some absorb the merchant fee Klarna charges (which sits in the low single-digit percentage range for BNPL transactions); others pass it on, either as a visible deposit fee or as a reduced bonus amount. The latter is more common than most players notice — a “100% match up to £100” with a 3% payment processing deduction on Klarna deposits effectively becomes a 97% match, and the T&Cs usually permit it. Check the payment-method-specific terms before you deposit, not after.

Alternatives to Klarna for UK Casino Deposits

Most UK players who wanted Klarna wanted it for one of two reasons: they didn’t want to use their debit card directly, or they wanted to spread the cost. The first reason has clean alternatives. The second doesn’t, because credit-funded gambling is exactly what the regulatory framework is designed to prevent.

For privacy-minded players, the viable alternatives are e-wallets — PayPal, Skrill, Neteller — and prepaid options like Paysafecard. E-wallets sit between your bank and the operator, so the operator never sees your card number and your bank statement shows a single e-wallet transaction rather than a gambling deposit. PayPal is the strongest option for UK players specifically because it’s regulated by the FCA, has its own dispute resolution process, and is accepted by the majority of UK-licensed operators. Skrill and Neteller are faster for withdrawals — often same-day — but charge fees on certain transaction types that PayPal doesn’t.

Prepaid methods like Paysafecard solve the privacy problem completely: you buy a voucher with cash, enter the code, and there’s no link to your bank account at all. The trade-off is that withdrawals aren’t possible to a Paysafecard, so you’ll need a secondary method for cashing out, and the operator will require bank verification for that method. It’s a deposit-only solution, and pretending otherwise is how people end up with funds stuck in limbo.

For players who genuinely wanted the instalment feature, there isn’t a regulated alternative in the UK market, and there shouldn’t be. If you need to spread the cost of a deposit across instalments, that’s a signal that the deposit amount is too large for your current financial position — and the Gambling Commission’s financial vulnerability guidance is explicit that operators have a duty to recognise exactly that pattern. The “pay in four” proposition applied to gambling isn’t a convenience feature. It’s a harm multiplier with a friendly app interface.

Fast Withdrawal Options Compared

Withdrawal speed is where payment method choice has the most tangible impact on your experience, and it’s also where the gap between marketing claims and operational reality is widest. An operator advertising “instant withdrawals” is usually describing the fastest possible scenario — a small amount, a previously verified account, an e-wallet destination, processed during business hours — not the typical experience.

The table below breaks down the realistic withdrawal timelines by payment method for UK-licensed operators. These are category-level figures derived from published operator terms and standard industry processing windows, not guarantees from any specific brand. First-time withdrawals are almost always slower because they trigger identity and source-of-funds checks that subsequent withdrawals skip.

Payment method	Typical processing time	Withdrawal supported	Typical fee	Best suited for
Debit card (Visa/Mastercard)	1–3 working days after processing	Yes	None from operator; issuer may charge	Players who want simplicity and don’t mind the bank statement trail
PayPal	Same day to 24 hours after processing	Yes	None from operator in most cases	Privacy-conscious players wanting FCA-regulated middle layer
Skrill / Neteller	Same day to 12 hours after processing	Yes	Variable; some operators charge on e-wallet withdrawals	Speed-focused players who prioritise fast cash-out over bonus eligibility
Bank transfer (Open Banking)	1–2 working days after processing	Yes	None from operator; bank may charge for international	Large withdrawals where card limits are a constraint
Klarna (pay now / card variant)	2–4 working days after processing	Limited; often bank transfer fallback	Variable; merchant fee may be passed on	Players who already use Klarna for other payments and want consolidation
Paysafecard	N/A — deposit only	No	N/A	Maximum deposit privacy; requires secondary withdrawal method
Apple Pay / Google Pay	1–2 working days after processing	Yes, via linked card	None from operator	Mobile-first players who want biometric-authenticated deposits

Two observations from that table deserve more than a passing glance. Firste-wallets dominate the “fast withdrawal” category not because operators process them faster in absolute terms, but because the receiving side is faster. A PayPal withdrawal that sits in your account within an hour of approval is functionally instant from your perspective; a debit card withdrawal approved at 4pm on a Friday might not appear until Tuesday, because card networks don’t process on weekends and banks don’t either. The operator’s processing time is only half the equation. The other half is how quickly the destination method can receive and clear the funds, and that’s where e-wallets win by a distance that has nothing to do with the casino.

Chicken Road Game Casino UK 2026: Where the Crossy Road Meets Your Bankroll

Second, the “no fee” column is doing a lot of quiet work. Operators rarely charge explicit withdrawal fees anymore — it’s bad optics and regulators have signalled disapproval. But fees reappear in other forms: minimum withdrawal thresholds that force you to accumulate more before cashing out, maximum withdrawal caps per transaction or per day that push large wins into multiple slower payouts, and currency conversion charges when the operator settles in a different currency than your account. A “free” withdrawal that requires three separate transactions at £2,000 each, each taking two days, isn’t free. It’s just expensive in time instead of money.

How We Evaluate Payment Methods and Operators

Any ranking or comparison in this space is only as honest as its methodology, so here’s ours stated plainly. We assess operators on five dimensions: regulatory standing, payment method breadth, withdrawal speed and reliability, bonus terms transparency, and responsible gambling tooling. Each dimension is weighted, and the weights reflect what actually matters to a UK player in 2026 rather than what makes for a compelling headline.

Regulatory standing carries the highest weight because it’s binary — an operator is either licensed by the Gambling Commission or it isn’t, and there’s no partial credit for being “nearly compliant.” Payment method breadth matters because it determines whether you can use your preferred deposit and withdrawal route without workarounds. Withdrawal speed is weighted heavily because it’s the single most common source of player complaints to the Commission’s alternative dispute resolution services. Bonus transparency is assessed by reading the full T&Cs rather than the marketing page — specifically the wagering requirements, game weightings, maximum bet rules, and time limits, which together determine whether a headline offer is worth anything. Responsible gambling tooling covers deposit limits, loss limits, session time reminders, self-exclusion integration with GAMSTOP, and the quality of the operator’s interaction when a player shows signs of harm.

What we don’t do: accept payment for placement, allow operators to review or approve their entries before publication, or adjust rankings based on commercial relationships. That last point matters more than it sounds. The affiliate model that funds most comparison content in this niche creates an obvious incentive to rank operators by commission rate rather than by quality, and the result is the kind of page where every operator is “excellent” and the differences between them are described in adjectives instead of numbers. We’d rather tell you that a category-typical withdrawal takes one to three working days and let you decide whether that’s acceptable than pretend every operator on the list is “lightning fast.”

The Klarna-specific assessment follows the same logic. An operator gets credit for listing Klarna only if the implementation is functional — deposits process, the payment method is clearly identified in the cashier, and the withdrawal path back to Klarna (or to a verified alternative) is documented in the T&Cs rather than left to be discovered at the point of cashing out. An operator that lists Klarna but routes all withdrawals to bank transfer without disclosing this in advance doesn’t get credit for “supporting Klarna.” It gets a note about incomplete payment method integration.

New Online Casinos and Klarna in 2026

New casino launches in the UK follow a predictable pattern when it comes to payment methods. The operator launches with a conservative set — debit cards, one or two e-wallets, bank transfer — because that’s what passes compliance review fastest. Klarna, if it appears at all, shows up six to eighteen months post-launch, once the operator has established transaction volume sufficient to absorb the merchant fees and has built the compliance infrastructure to handle the regulatory questions around credit-adjacent payments.

The 2026 crop of new UK-licensed operators is, with few exceptions, not listing Klarna at launch. The regulatory environment is too tight, the FCA’s BNPL oversight is too new, and the Gambling Commission’s financial vulnerability guidance is too fresh for a startup operator to want to be the test case. What new operators are doing instead is optimising for the payment methods that regulators already view favourably: open banking transfers, which give operators direct account-to-account settlement with full identity verification built in; Apple Pay and Google Pay, which satisfy the “payment account in the customer’s own name” requirement through biometric authentication; and PayPal, which carries its own regulatory credibility as an FCA-authorised institution.

That shift has a practical implication for players who were hoping new casinos would be more Klarna-friendly than established ones. They won’t be. The trend is moving in the opposite direction — toward fewer payment methods, each more thoroughly verified, rather than more methods with looser controls. If anything, new operators in 2026 are more restrictive than their predecessors, because the compliance cost of a payment method scandal is existential for a brand with no established reputation to protect.

For players tracking new casino launches specifically for payment method innovation, the interesting developments aren’t in Klarna integration at all. They’re in open banking, which is quietly becoming the default for UK-licensed operators because it satisfies every regulatory requirement in one step: the account is in the player’s name, the transaction is verified in real time, the operator receives confirmation of funds before crediting the balance, and the whole process takes seconds rather than minutes. Klarna’s advantage as a payment middle layer — privacy, convenience, brand recognition — is being eroded by open banking’s advantage as a compliance solution, and that erosion is accelerating.

Anonymous Crypto Casino UK 2026: The Full Picture Nobody Prints Straight

Responsible Gambling and Payment Method Choice

The payment method you choose to fund a gambling account isn’t a neutral technical decision. It shapes your spending patterns, your ability to self-regulate, and the speed at which you can act on an impulse — and all three of those factors are directly relevant to gambling harm. This isn’t a moralising point. It’s a mechanical one, and the mechanics are worth understanding.

Debit card deposits are the slowest impulse route because they require you to have the funds available and they appear on your bank statement, where they’re visible to you and anyone else with access to the account. That visibility acts as a friction mechanism — not a reliable one, but a friction mechanism nonetheless. E-wallet deposits are faster and less visible, which cuts both ways: less friction for legitimate use, less friction for problematic use. Prepaid vouchers are the fastest impulse route because they can be purchased with cash and require no connection to any account, which makes them the worst choice for anyone who has ever deposited more than they intended to in a single session.

Klarna’s BNPL variant would have been, by this analysis, the most harmful payment method available for gambling — not because Klarna is a bad company, but because the product structure removes the friction that debit cards provide. Spending money you don’t yet have, on an activity with a house edge, with no visible cost until the instalments come due, is the exact combination that the Gambling Commission’s financial vulnerability framework exists to prevent. The fact that the BNPL variant is effectively unavailable for UK gambling deposits is a regulatory success, not a market failure.

Every operator listed above is required to offer responsible gambling tools: deposit limits (daily, weekly, monthly), loss limits, session time reminders, reality checks, self-exclusion via GAMSTOP, and direct links to support organisations including GamCare and the National Gambling Helpline on 0808 8020 133. These tools are only effective if you use them, and they’re only available if you set them up before you need them — which is to say, before you’ve deposited more than you planned to. The operators that make these tools easy to find and quick to set up score higher in our assessment than the ones that bury them in a settings submenu three clicks deep.

Can I deposit with Klarna at UK-licensed casinos?

Most UK-licensed casinos no longer accept Klarna as a deposit method, particularly the pay-in-four BNPL variant, due to Gambling Commission rules prohibiting credit-funded gambling. Some operators may offer Klarna’s pay-now or direct card option, which functions like a debit card. Check the operator’s cashier and payment terms directly, as availability changes frequently and isn’t always clearly advertised.

Is it legal to use Klarna for online gambling in the UK?

Using Klarna itself isn’t illegal, but UK-licensed operators are prohibited from accepting deposits funded by credit under Licence Condition 5.1.1 and the Commission’s financial vulnerability guidance. If an operator accepts a Klarna BNPL deposit, that operator is operating outside its licence conditions. Playing at unlicensed sites that accept Klarna exposes you to no regulatory protection, no dispute resolution, and no responsible gambling safeguards.

Why did casinos stop accepting Klarna?

Three converging pressures. The Gambling Commission tightened payment method rules to exclude credit-funded deposits. The FCA’s expanded oversight of BNPL products increased the compliance burden on operators accepting Klarna. And open banking emerged as a faster, cheaper, more regulator-friendly alternative that achieves the same privacy benefits without the credit risk. Operators dropped Klarna because the regulatory cost exceeded the commercial benefit, not because of any specific incident.

What is the fastest withdrawal method for UK casino players?

E-wallets — PayPal, Skrill, Neteller — are consistently the fastest withdrawal methods, with funds typically arriving within hours of operator approval rather than the one to three working days common with debit cards. Skrill and Neteller edge ahead of PayPal on raw speed, but PayPal offers stronger consumer protection and is accepted more widely across UK-licensed operators. Bank transfers via open banking are closing the gap and are preferable for large withdrawals where card limits apply.

Can I get a refund if I deposited via Klarna and lost?

No. Gambling losses are not refundable through any payment method, and Klarna is no exception. The only scenario where a payment dispute might apply is if the deposit was made without your authorisation — for example, if someone else used your Klarna account — which would be a fraud matter rather than a gambling dispute. If you’re experiencing harm from gambling, the appropriate route is the National Gambling Helpline on 0808 8020 133, not a payment chargeback.

Do new casinos accept Klarna in 2026?

Rarely at launch. New UK-licensed operators typically begin with debit cards, e-wallets, and bank transfer, adding Klarna only if and when the compliance infrastructure supports it. The 2026 trend is toward open banking and mobile payment methods rather than BNPL integration, so new casinos are less likely to offer Klarna than established ones — not more. Players hoping for greater Klarna acceptance among newer operators will be disappointed by the direction of travel.

The payment method landscape in UK gambling is tightening, not loosening, and Klarna’s position within it reflects that. The BNPL variant is effectively locked out of the regulated market by design, the pay-now variant offers no meaningful advantage over a debit card, and the privacy benefits that drove early adoption are being superseded by open banking’s ability to provide the same privacy with better regulatory compliance. For a player in 2026, the practical question isn’t whether casinos accept Klarna — it’s whether Klarna offers anything that a well-chosen e-wallet or open banking transfer doesn’t, and the honest answer is: not much, and the “not much” comes with slower withdrawals and more friction at the cashier than the alternatives. The one thing Klarna’s pay-in-four did offer — the ability to gamble with money you don’t have yet — is the one thing the UK regulatory framework was right to take away, and the fact that it took it away through payment method rules rather than through outright prohibition tells you everything about how the Gambling Commission views the relationship between credit and harm.

And the operators who kept Klarna in their cashiers longest were, predictably, the ones with the thinnest compliance departments — which tells you something about what “accepting Klarna” actually signalled in 2025. Not innovation. Not player choice. A willingness to cut corners on the one area where corner-cutting has consequences measured in licence reviews rather than customer complaints.

What’s left, once the marketing language is stripped out, is a payment method that solved a problem the regulated market no longer has. UK players wanted privacy from their banks; open banking and e-wallets delivered it without the credit risk. UK operators wanted instant settlement with no chargeback exposure; debit cards and PayPal provide that too, with the added benefit of not requiring an explanation to the Commission’s compliance team. Klarna’s remaining niche in UK gambling is essentially players who already use it for everything else and can’t be bothered to set up a second payment method — a real but narrow segment, and one that shrinks every time an operator simplifies its cashier to reduce regulatory overhead.

Which leaves the reader in an odd position: the headline query — casinos that accept Klarna UK 2026 — has a thinner answer than it did two years ago, and the trend line suggests it’ll be thinner again by 2027. The operators who still list it are doing so for the pay-now variant, which is functionally a debit card with extra steps, and the ones who’ve dropped it have done so for reasons that have nothing to do with player preference and everything to do with licence condition compliance. The honest recommendation is to stop looking for Klarna acceptance and start looking at whether the operator you’re considering offers PayPal, Skrill, or open banking — because those are the methods that’ll still be there next year, and the ones that’ll still be there are the ones worth building your deposit and withdrawal habits around. It’s a shame, in a way — the pay-in-four model was genuinely convenient for retail purchases, and watching it get locked out of gambling entirely means the one use case where it was arguably most dangerous is the one it’s been banned from, while the harmless use cases carry on unaffected. Anyway. The cashier page on most UK sites now loads with a spinner that takes about four seconds longer than it should, and nobody’s fixed it.

It’s a shame, in a way — the pay-in-four model was genuinely convenient for retail purchases, and watching it get locked out of gambling entirely means the one use case where it was arguably most dangerous is the one it’s been banned from, while the harmless use cases carry on unaffected. Anyway. The cashier page on most UK sites now loads with a spinner that takes about four seconds longer than it should, and nobody’s fixed it.