Not upheld: account administration - failure to update passbook and statement documentation following product switch complaint against Skipton Building Society
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6336250 of 2026-05-21T00:00:00+00:00. account administration - failure to update passbook and statement documentation following product switch complaint against Skipton Building Society. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6336250 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-21T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Skipton Building Society |
| Product | savings - ISA (Individual Savings Account) |
| Claim type | account administration - failure to update passbook and statement documentation following product switch |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | The ombudsman noted that Skipton had previously offered £25 compensation, which Mr S should claim directly if still available. No additional remedy was ordered. |
Summary
Mr S complained that Skipton Building Society failed to update his passbook to reflect the transfer of funds from his matured Fixed Rate Cash ISA to a new Branch Cash ISA Base Rate Tracker, and that his annual statement was headed with the new product name despite showing interest earned on the old product. Skipton explained that system limitations prevented showing product switches in passbooks as no financial transaction occurred, only a product change, and that it had provided alternative documentation including a switch instruction and formal confirmation letter. The ombudsman accepted Skipton's technical limitations as genuine and found that the alternative documentation provided was sufficient, concluding that Skipton acted fairly and reasonably despite Mr S's frustration with the passbook presentation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman accepted that Skipton's IT systems genuinely could not display product switches in passbooks because no financial transaction occurred, only a product change. While Mr S contended Skipton was not telling the truth, the ombudsman found this claim unbelievable and noted that any enforceable decision would require Skipton to be capable of compliance. The ombudsman concluded that Skipton provided sufficient alternative documentation (switch instruction and formal letter) to evidence the transfer, and therefore acted fairly and reasonably despite Mr S's frustration.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Skipton Building Society, all decisions | 498 | 27% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website