Upheld: Unfair application of bonus interest rate eligibility criteria due to unclear communication complaint against Zopa Bank Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6315371 of 2026-06-09T00:00:00+00:00. Unfair application of bonus interest rate eligibility criteria due to unclear communication complaint against Zopa Bank Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6315371 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-09T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Zopa Bank Limited |
| Product | Savings / ISA |
| Claim type | Unfair application of bonus interest rate eligibility criteria due to unclear communication |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Zopa Bank Limited must pay Mr A the additional interest he would have earned at the 4.75% bonus rate in December 2025 compared to the standard rate he actually received. Zopa must also add simple interest to this amount at a time-weighted average Bank of England base rate plus one percentage point from approximately 23 December 2025 to the date of payment. The £100 compensation already paid is retained. |
Summary
Mr A opened a Zopa current account in October 2025 and inquired about qualifying for a 4.75% bonus interest rate. A Zopa agent explained he needed to transfer £500 monthly from an external account to his 'primary' account, which Mr A interpreted as his savings account primary pot. Mr A transferred funds from external account to savings account to current account in October and November 2025 and received the bonus rate both months. In December 2025, after Zopa implemented systems to detect internal transfers, it refused to pay the bonus rate despite Mr A following the same process. The Ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding that Zopa's unclear terminology and failure to correct Mr A's understanding when paying bonus interest in October and November 2025 caused the issue, and ordered Zopa to pay the lost bonus interest plus interest on that amount.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The Ombudsman found that Zopa's agent used unclear terminology ('primary' account) when explaining the bonus criteria, leading Mr A to reasonably interpret this as the primary pot in his savings account rather than the current account. Although Zopa's published terms correctly stated the requirement, the manner of explanation was unclear. Mr A reasonably relied on Zopa's October 2025 guidance and assumed he was meeting the criteria when he received bonus interest in October and November 2025 without being told otherwise. Zopa's December 2025 message was also not sufficiently clear about the requirement for direct deposits from external accounts. The root cause was Zopa's unclear communication, not Mr A's actions. Once Mr A understood the correct criteria, he complied immediately.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Zopa Bank Limited, all decisions | 545 | 27% |
| Savings / ISA, all decisions | 7,604 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website