Not upheld: unfair contract variation and withdrawal of product complaint against Santander UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C opened a business account in 2004 marketed as 'free banking forever' and complained when Santander notified him in July 2025 of migration to a fee-paying account in October 2025. Santander argued the marketing promise was never included in binding terms and conditions, which consistently allowed changes with notice, and that regulatory changes since 2004 justified the fee. The ombudsman found the contractual terms clearly permitted changes with adequate notice, the marketing materials themselves qualified the promise with reference to regulatory changes, and significant regulatory developments (anti-money laundering, fraud prevention) had substantially increased banking costs. The ombudsman concluded Santander was entitled to make this change and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while the account was marketed as 'free banking forever', the contractual terms and conditions have consistently allowed Santander to make changes with notice. The 'free banking forever' promise in marketing materials was expressly subject to changes in law and regulation. Significant regulatory changes since 2004 (anti-money laundering, fraud prevention, etc.) have increased banking costs. Santander provided adequate 60 days' notice as required. As a commercial business, Santander is entitled to withdraw uneconomic products. The ombudsman would not compel indefinite provision of an uneconomic product even if a contractual obligation existed.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website