Not upheld: Account administration errors complaint against The Mansfield Building Society

Decision detail

Summary

Mr and Mrs S complained that MBS took a direct debit payment after they had re-mortgaged, and that the refund was delayed. MBS had informed them in early December that if redemption occurred after 20 December, it would take the payment and refund it. Although the re-mortgage completed on 20 December 2019, MBS did not receive the redemption funds until 23 December 2019, making it too late to cancel the direct debit due on 25 December. The payment was taken on 27 December, and Mr S contacted MBS on 31 December requesting a refund. MBS said it would refund on 2 January 2020, the next working day. The ombudsman found that MBS had acted reasonably throughout, providing clear information, following appropriate procedures, and offering to use faster payments once the direct debit had cleared. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that MBS acted reasonably throughout. MBS had provided clear advance information about what would happen if redemption was delayed beyond 20 December. The delay in receiving redemption funds (23 December instead of 20 December) was not MBS's error. MBS's refund process was reasonable - it waited for the direct debit to clear before processing the refund, and offered to use faster payments once cleared. The timing of the refund (2 January 2020) was the next working day after Mr S's contact on 31 December, which was appropriate given the three bank holidays and reduced staffing over the Christmas period. MBS did not treat Mr and Mrs S unfairly.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website