Upheld: service failure and delay in processing account closure instructions complaint against Cynergy Bank Plc
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6339994 of 2026-05-07T00:00:00+00:00. service failure and delay in processing account closure instructions complaint against Cynergy Bank Plc. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6339994 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-07T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Cynergy Bank Plc |
| Product | savings account |
| Claim type | service failure and delay in processing account closure instructions |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Interest at 8% per annum on the account balances from 19 August 2024 to 9 May 2025. Compensation of £250. No reimbursement of legal costs. |
Summary
Mr H and Mrs H, represented by solicitors A, instructed Cynergy Bank to close accounts following the application of the survivorship principle after their son's death in 2010. A sent closure instructions on 9 July 2024, but Cynergy delayed processing due to missing information (account name and Letter of Authority). Despite attempts to contact in August 2024 and a chase in November 2024, no action was taken until March 2025 when the FOS became involved. The accounts were finally closed on 9 May 2025. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding Cynergy caused unnecessary delays, and awarded £250 compensation plus 8% interest from 19 August 2024 to 9 May 2025, but rejected the claim for legal costs.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
Cynergy accepted it caused delays and apologised. However, not all delays were Cynergy's responsibility as there were long gaps in contact between A and Cynergy. The compensation of £250 was fair. Legal costs should not be covered as Mr H and Mrs H chose to use solicitors. Interest should be payable at 8% (the default rate for complaints received before 1 January 2026) from 19 August 2024, which allows reasonable time for Cynergy to have received the 9 July letter, requested the Letter of Authority, and processed the instruction. Interest should run until 9 May 2025 when funds were actually paid out. No evidence supported the 4.25% rate claimed by A.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Cynergy Bank Plc, all decisions | 27 | 32% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website