Santander E-saver account reduced to 0.1 %

projectzero

Okay thanks FFC. Sorry to hear you've also had problems with these villains. Clearly you've had a fair amount of experience in this area. I guess I'm a little naive in relation to these type of issues. However,I still argue that when I opened this account there was no mention of a 12 month or indeed any period of time associated with the rate. There were no number issue this, issue number that. I just put in my money and it paid interest,that was it. So therefore it's not unreasonable for me to assume,without the benefit of hindsite,that this would continue ad infinitum. I can't learn about something I don't know about. I will take this case on despite the gloomy forecast. Something needs to be done about these people and my small and perhaps even futile attempt to seek justice is better than doing nothing at all. At least my posting this may make others more aware. Santander have some heavy karma due,staff that deal directly with these complaints are as guilty as,and should hang their heads in absolute shame. Hiding behind terms and conditions is no excuse. Thanks again - Pz

opinions4u

Ilya_Ilyich wrote: »

Because the bank is the party with knowledge, experience, and a substantial legal department that establishes exactly what they can do to exploit the other party. The consumer has none of these advantages. The bank knows fine well that their consumers would like to be informed of changes to the interest rate on their account; neglecting to inform said consumer is deception by omission.

So where have we established that the bank hasn't communicated the rate changes? Web sites. Branch literature. Posters. Newspaper adverts. I bet at least 3 out of 4 of these happened.

Ponder the wider world. Newspapers, 24 hour news channels, mainstream news broadcasts, web sites telling the people that interest rates are crashing through the floor.

Look at the money pages of a national newspaper, consumer sites like this etc and you will see clear and sensible information being handed out to consumers day in day out to review their savings accounts regularly.

There is choice out there in the market place.

(By the way, my knowledge of marketing does tell me that if you write to people saying "you're good rate had come to an end" a significant majority sit there and do nothing because they can never quite motivate themselves to get off their backsides and do something about it).

Why are you so desperate to appease the bank and condemn the consumer?

It isn't a case of appeasement. A bank or building society has a line to tread between profitability and customer service. They also have to comply with their own terms and conditions and the law of the land. If they can't get that balance right, and customers walk, that's fine by me.

I'm advocating being a rate tart. Nothing more, nothing less.

Do you believe a moral society is one in which the beneficiary of an act deserves the benefit, regardless of the act?

I believe in a society where the individual takes responsibility for themselves and doesn't expect to be nannied by others.

projectzero wrote: »

I guess I'm a little naive in relation to these type of issues.

And if you are, don't be in future. Your money. Either it matters to you or it doesn't.

However,I still argue that when I opened this account there was no mention of a 12 month or indeed any period of time associated with the rate.

I suspect you were fed misinformation on that one. You bought a variable rate savings account. Bank of England rates, LIBOR rates and Swap rates fell - in the case of BofE rates by 5%. Your variable rate savings account rate also fell, as you would surely have expected it to.

I just put in my money and it paid interest,that was it. So therefore it's not unreasonable for me to assume,without the benefit of hindsite,that this would continue ad infinitum. I can't learn about something I don't know about.

But you did (surely?) know it was a variable rate savings account.

I will take this case on despite the gloomy forecast. Something needs to be done about these people and my small and perhaps even futile attempt to seek justice is better than doing nothing at all.

Take it on by all means. The FOS is a free service. You even have the right to take it to court if you so wish, although that will cost. But they have complied with the law. They have complied with the terms and conditions that you signed up to and you have admitted yourself that you never quite got round to looking after your own affairs in this respect.

At least my posting this may make others more aware. Santander have some heavy karma due,staff that deal directly with these complaints are as guilty as,and should hang their heads in absolute shame. Hiding behind terms and conditions is no excuse. Thanks again - Pz

Look, other than your rather important lesson in life about keeping an eye on your own money, terms and conditions are rather important documents. While they might look rather long winded and boring, I strongly suggest to you and everybody else on the planet that they are worth reading. They tell you what you can and can't do with an account. They tell you how they will communicate interest rate changes to you. They are a document that works both ways and if a bank or building society deviates from them (which does occasionally happen) they give a consumer great power.

Look in the mirror. Learn from the experience and move on. Hopefully, in future, you'll have more money to look after and be far better at taking control of your own affairs. If you don't, you sure as hell know that the bank's agenda is to make profits for shareholders and that interest rates are variable.

Stompa

projectzero wrote: »

However,I still argue that when I opened this account there was no mention of a 12 month or indeed any period of time associated with the rate.

There are essentially two main types of rate. Variable (which can change at any time) and Fixed (which typically remains the same for a specified period). The esaver will have been variable, and I have a hunch that the rate included a small bonus for the first year.

I opened one myself in 2001, but stopped using it 18 months later when the rate became uncompetitive.

I suspect this:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/1670943

may be referring to the same account.

Ilya_Ilyich

Did you open the account online or at a branch?

johnmoney05

I have a question for OP, how much interest you think is "correct"?

I have some saving accounts paying 0.1% to 3%, some current accounts paying nothing, some I pay to use...

jimjames

I'm confused by the initial post. In one place it says the account stopped paying interest but in another it says the rate dropped to 0.1%. Which is it? If the bank stopped paying any interest then there may be a case to answer as it would appear to be a significant change to the account but 0.1% although low is actually still paying interest.

I'm sure no-one has been in such a bubble over the last 3 years that they are unaware that base rates have dropped from well over 5% to 0.5% and that bank accounts have done the same?

ChiefGrasscutter

jimjames wrote: »

I'm sure no-one has been in such a bubble over the last 3 years that they are unaware that base rates have dropped from well over 5% to 0.5% and that bank accounts have done the same?

Sadly, I'm afraid many do exist in such a bubble.

What is really worrying is what their thought processes are when it comes time to vote in elections.

Andystriker

Yet another example of someone not liking the answers to a question. Opinions and YB are not being rude, just telling it the way it is.

Then in reply a poster uses the word despicable.

There will always be people like the OP who will blame everyone but themselves and it will go on happening, because they live in a bubble and say "its not my fault gov".

The OP in a post above says "It is not unreasonable for me to assume etc".

Well OP it is unreasonable to assume anything to do with money.

My late Dad said to me many years ago when I was a nipper,

"People who assume make an A$$ out of U and ME".

How right he was

Dr_Cuckoo3

YorkshireBoy wrote: »

Why is it obvious?

The FOS will throw out your complaint at the first stage, ie it won't even get to an adjudicator, in order that they can deal with more valid complaints.

This is untrue

How would this poster know that the complaint would not get to an adjudicator unless he has previous similar experiance or knows someone who does

The complaint would get to an adjudicator - I am trigger happy with the FOS and they all go the the adjudicator

Freephone and Freepost - no cost to me :rotfl:

kevin52

Because banks such as Santander introduce headline grabbing rates which quickly drop, I only invest in fixed term rates for 1/2/3 years. When the term expires this forces me search the best rate and I move my money if necessary. Don't let them rip you off.
I'm surprised that some posters think the banks behaviour acceptable.