Not upheld: mortgage application handling; interest rate terms; consent requirements for rate porting complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6365117 of 2026-06-10T00:00:00+00:00. mortgage application handling; interest rate terms; consent requirements for rate porting complaint against Barclays Bank UK PLC. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6365117 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-10T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Barclays Bank UK PLC |
| Product | Mortgage |
| Claim type | mortgage application handling; interest rate terms; consent requirements for rate porting |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No additional remedy ordered. The ombudsman found that Barclays' previous payment of £700 compensation plus two £150 refunds (primarily for separate issues with the mortgage current account) represented fair compensation overall. |
Summary
Ms C complained that Barclays mishandled her mortgage application following divorce, resulting in two different interest rates on different parts of the mortgage. She needed to refinance from £155,000 to £325,000 with a family member joining as joint borrower sole proprietor. Barclays required consent from her former husband to port the old fixed rate in full; without consent it would only allow 50% porting. After Ms C complained in mid-January, Barclays made an exception and allowed full porting without consent. Ms C subsequently chose not to apply for a lower interest rate that became available, fearing the risk of missing her court-ordered completion deadline. The ombudsman found Barclays handled the application fairly and reasonably, as the two interest rates resulted from Ms C's circumstances and her decision to port rather than pay an early repayment charge, not from any unfair action by Barclays.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that Barclays' requirement for consent from the former husband to port the full old mortgage rate was reasonable policy, as both parties to the joint mortgage had equal rights to port the rate. The ombudsman noted that Ms C had the choice between paying the ERC for a single new rate or porting the old rate (which required consent), and that Barclays made a fair exception to its policy by allowing full porting without consent after Ms C complained. The ombudsman found no unreasonable delay in the application process and determined that the requirement for a new application to change interest rates mid-process was standard practice. The ombudsman concluded that the two different interest rates resulted from Ms C's circumstances and her decision to port rather than pay the ERC, not from any unfair action by Barclays.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Barclays Bank UK PLC, all decisions | 11,143 | 21% |
| Mortgage, all decisions | 25,098 | 22% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website