Not upheld: treatment in arrears, forbearance, reasonable adjustments, complaint handling, valuations, product transfers complaint against Yorkshire Building Society trading as Chelsea Building Society
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6292727 of 2026-04-21T00:00:00+00:00. treatment in arrears, forbearance, reasonable adjustments, complaint handling, valuations, product transfers complaint against Yorkshire Building Society trading as Chelsea Building Society. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6292727 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-21T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Yorkshire Building Society trading as Chelsea Building Society |
| Product | mortgage |
| Claim type | treatment in arrears, forbearance, reasonable adjustments, complaint handling, valuations, product transfers |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | Pay Ms M total compensation of £350 (£150 for careless communication during complaint plus £200 for failure to consistently use large font); ensure all future written communication issued in size 16 font unless Ms M requests otherwise |
Summary
Ms M complained about Chelsea Building Society's treatment following her fall into arrears on two buy-to-let mortgages after serious illness in 2022. The complaint covered five main areas: property re-valuations in November 2024, complaint handling in 2025, communication difficulties, lack of forbearance and product transfers, and non-implementation of a 2023 agreement to capitalise arrears. The Ombudsman found the re-valuations reasonable and outside its remit to challenge, the complaint handling contained careless phrasing warranting £150 compensation, and Chelsea's departmental structure was not unfair. The Ombudsman ordered an additional £200 compensation for failure to consistently use large font in communications and required future written communication in size 16 font, but did not uphold the complaint regarding forbearance or product transfer offers.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The Ombudsman found that the re-valuations in November 2024 were reasonable as the properties had not been valued since 2008 and updated loan-to-value ratios were needed for interest rate product eligibility. The independent surveyor's valuations fell outside the Ombudsman's scope. Chelsea's offer of an appeal process was appropriate. Regarding the 2025 complaint, whilst the phrasing was careless, Chelsea's £150 compensation offer was fair. Chelsea's requirement to deal with different departments for different issues was not unfair, though failure to consistently use large font warranted additional compensation. Chelsea's acceptance of reduced payments without a formal arrangement was prudent, and the offers of new interest rate deals were generous and not required to be renewed when expired. The Ombudsman noted the mortgages are unregulated commercial transactions held to a higher standard than consumer mortgages.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Yorkshire Building Society trading as Chelsea Building Society, all decisions | 1 | 0% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website