Not upheld: failure to answer customer query in initial response; complaint handling complaint against Santander UK Plc trading as Cahoot

Decision detail

Summary

Mr G complained that Cahoot failed to answer all his questions about a savings account in its initial response, requiring him to send a follow-up message. Specifically, Cahoot did not address his question about whether the 12-month bonus period started from account opening or first deposit. Mr G also complained about the time spent pursuing the complaint and Cahoot's failure to acknowledge the initial error. The ombudsman found that while Cahoot did not answer the query initially, the follow-up communication was brief, the answer was provided within a reasonable timeframe, and the overall inconvenience was minimal. The ombudsman concluded that an apology was sufficient remedy and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman acknowledged that Cahoot failed to answer Mr G's query in its initial response, requiring a follow-up message. However, the ombudsman found that the follow-up communication was brief and did not take significant time, the information was provided within a reasonable timeframe (four days after the follow-up), and there was no evidence Mr G needed the information urgently. The ombudsman determined that the overall impact was minimal and constituted a one-off incident that was quickly corrected. The ombudsman noted that complaint handling is not a regulated activity and therefore outside the scope of FOS review. The ombudsman concluded that an apology was sufficient remedy and that compensation is not warranted for minor inconveniences that are part of normal service interactions.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website