Not upheld: Account administration errors complaint against Santander UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

F, a limited company, complained that Santander UK Plc unfairly introduced a £9.99 monthly fee to its business account in July 2025, despite the account being marketed as 'free forever' when opened around 2008. Santander migrated the account to a new Classic Account with a different charging structure. The ombudsman found that while the marketing material promised free banking forever, this was not a contractual commitment, and the actual contract contained variation clauses permitting the bank to change fees with notice. The ombudsman concluded that Santander acted fairly in relying on these contractual terms, which are standard in the banking sector and were clearly communicated. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman concluded that while the marketing material promised 'free forever' banking, this was not a contractual commitment. The actual contract was set out in the terms and conditions, which F agreed to and which contained variation clauses permitting the bank to change fees with notice. All versions of the terms and conditions contained such variation clauses. The ombudsman found these clauses to be standard in the banking sector, clearly worded, and fair. The ombudsman rejected the argument that cost pressures were foreseeable, noting instead that technological change since 2008 had been substantial and unforeseen. The ombudsman distinguished this commercial contract between businesses from consumer or employment contracts, and noted that only courts can determine if specific contract terms are unfair. Santander had adhered to its contractual obligations and provided more notice than required.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website