Not upheld: account closure without adequate notice complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC trading as Barclaycard

Decision detail

Summary

Mr A complained that Barclaycard unfairly closed his credit card account in September 2025 without adequate notice or explanation, shortly after reopening it in August 2025. He claimed the closure affected his mental health, finances, and credit score, and argued he was a vulnerable consumer. The ombudsman reviewed the card's terms and conditions, which permitted closure with two months' notice, but found that the account had a zero balance and was not regularly used since reopening. The ombudsman concluded that the lack of notice had no significant impact on Mr A and that there was a potential benefit in preventing further spending on a card due to close. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while the terms and conditions may have technically required two months' written notice, the specific circumstances of the case (zero balance and lack of regular use since reopening) meant there was no significant impact on Mr A. The ombudsman also identified a potential benefit to Mr A in preventing further spending on a card due to close. Although the ombudsman understood Mr A's frustration at not receiving a detailed explanation, Barclaycard had provided a reason for closure and was entitled to close the account under the terms. The ombudsman considered Mr A's vulnerability status and relevant rules but concluded this did not change the basic facts.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website