Not upheld: unfair contract terms and account migration complaint against Santander UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

D, a limited company, complained that Santander unfairly migrated its free business account to a fee-paying account (£9.99 monthly) despite being promised 'free banking forever' when opening the account in 2009. Santander argued the promise was only in marketing materials, not in the binding terms and conditions, which have always allowed changes. The ombudsman found that the terms and conditions are the binding contractual obligations and have consistently permitted changes for over 17 years. Santander provided more than the required 60 days' notice and is entitled to withdraw uneconomic products. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while the marketing literature promised 'free banking forever', the contractual terms and conditions have consistently allowed Santander to make changes to the account for over 17 years. The terms and conditions are the binding contractual obligations, not the marketing literature. Santander provided adequate notice (more than 60 days required) and is entitled as a commercial business to withdraw uneconomic products. Even if there had been a contractual obligation to provide free banking, Santander would not be obligated to maintain an uneconomic product indefinitely. The ombudsman rejected the mis-selling argument because D received what was promised at the time (free banking), and the issue is Santander's subsequent decision to change the product offering.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website