Not upheld: Account closure without notice complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard)
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5941280 of 2026-06-19T00:00:00+00:00. Account closure without notice complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard). Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5941280 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-19T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard) |
| Product | Credit card |
| Claim type | Account closure without notice |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | None. The complaint was not upheld. |
Summary
Mr R complained that Barclays unfairly closed his credit card account without notice and was withholding funds he had transferred into the account, creating a positive balance. Barclays maintained it acted within its rights and directed Mr R to his third-party bank to recall the transfer. The ombudsman found that financial institutions have the right to make commercial decisions about account closure and that Barclays acted fairly within its terms and regulatory obligations. The ombudsman also found no evidence of error by Barclays regarding the fund deposit, as Mr R had initiated the payment. The complaint was not upheld.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
Financial institutions have the right to decide whether to provide or continue providing accounts as a commercial decision. Barclays acted within its contractual rights and regulatory obligations when closing the account. The ombudsman found no evidence of error on the bank's part regarding the fund deposit, as Mr R initiated the payment. The ombudsman reviewed confidential information that satisfied them the decision to withhold funds was reasonable, though this information could not be disclosed to Mr R.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Barclays Bank UK PLC (trading as Barclaycard), all decisions | 61 | 12% |
| Account closure without notice, all decisions | 11,926 | 18% |
| Credit card, all decisions | 26,052 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website