Not upheld: complaint handling failures, service failures, data handling concerns complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Ms C and Mr C complained that Barclays incorrectly placed a marital dispute marker on their joint Buy To Let mortgage, which prevented Ms C from switching rates online. When Ms C contacted Barclays to remove the marker, citing health reasons for not visiting a branch, Barclays logged a complaint. The first complaint handler made four follow-up calls about the same issue, mentioned Ms C's health despite her stated preference not to have it noted, and sent a complaint response by post despite Ms C requesting email communication. A second complaint response incorrectly stated that Ms C's health had not been discussed. The ombudsman found that while Barclays made several mistakes in complaint handling, Ms C had already decided to remortgage elsewhere before these failures occurred, and the original marker was removed relatively quickly. The ombudsman upheld Barclays' offer of £250 total compensation (£50 already paid plus £200 additional) rather than the £2,000 Ms C sought.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Barclays made several mistakes in complaint handling—including poor complaint resolution requiring multiple calls, inaccurate statements in the second complaint letter, and sending a response by post despite a request for email—these did not justify the £2,000 compensation sought. The original error (the marital dispute marker) was corrected relatively quickly. Ms C's decision to remortgage elsewhere was made before the complaint handling failures occurred, as evidenced by her clear statement on 21 July that she was moving the mortgage to another provider. The mention of Ms C's health on one call was not unreasonable given she had raised it as a reason for not visiting a branch, and Barclays had not been made aware of her wish never to have it mentioned again. The ombudsman concluded that £250 total compensation (£50 already paid plus £200 offered) was fair and reasonable for the complaint handling failures.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website