Not upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Lloyds Bank PLC

Decision detail

Summary

Mr P complained that Lloyds Bank failed to communicate a branch closure fairly, discovering the news in a newspaper before receiving direct notification from the bank. He also raised concerns that his local MP was not informed, despite many customers residing in a neighbouring constituency. The ombudsman found that Lloyds met regulatory requirements by providing one year's notice and information on alternative banking services, and that the timing of the newspaper article relative to the letter did not disadvantage Mr P. The ombudsman determined that contacting additional MPs was not a regulatory requirement and upheld Lloyds' position that no further action was necessary.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Lloyds met regulatory requirements under FCA guidance by providing over 12 weeks' notice and information on alternative banking services. While acknowledging Mr P's disappointment at learning of the closure through the newspaper first, the ombudsman determined he was not disadvantaged by this timing, as he received the letter shortly after and had adequate notice. The ombudsman noted that contacting additional MPs was not a regulatory requirement, though it may have been helpful. The ombudsman also clarified that complaint handling itself falls outside the FOS's jurisdiction under DISP rules.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website