Veste

Not upheld: chargeback handling and refund request complaint against Santander UK Plc

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5989930 of 2026-04-21T00:00:00+00:00. chargeback handling and refund request complaint against Santander UK Plc. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-5989930
Decision date2026-04-21T00:00:00+00:00
FirmSantander UK Plc
ProductCurrent account
Claim typechargeback handling and refund request
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNo remedy ordered. Santander is not required to do anything further or issue any refunds.

Summary

Miss S made over 100 debit card payments totalling under £3,000 to a course provider in late 2023 but did not receive certificates despite attending the courses. She first contacted Santander in August/September 2024 requesting a refund through chargebacks, and Santander requested further information via disclaimer forms in September 2024. Miss S did not respond and later changed her mind about the disputes. When she recontacted Santander in April 2025, the firm advised it was too late to raise chargebacks due to the 120-day scheme time limit. The ombudsman found Santander acted fairly by requesting necessary information and correctly applying the chargeback scheme rules, which require disputes to be raised within 120 days of service completion.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that Santander acted fairly by requesting necessary information from Miss S in September 2024 to pursue chargebacks, and that Miss S's failure to provide this information prevented the chargebacks from being raised. When Miss S recontacted in April 2025, it was outside the 120-day chargeback window from the course completion date in 2024. The ombudsman noted that chargeback rules are set by card schemes and cannot be altered by Santander, and that chargebacks are not automatic rights but require meeting specific criteria and time limits.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Santander UK Plc, all decisions14,44522%
Current account, all decisions45,59019%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website