MSE News: Santander to charge for 'free' business accounts

swatterscars

Let's face it - Santander's action stinks. If they made a mistake by offering free banking forever, only to find it unsustainable, that is their problem. The more of us who complain to Santander, the more chance of them changing their decision.

cheapread

Marc Gander, of the Consumer Action Group, says anyone in Mr Daniels' position should think about going to the County Court to obtain a judgement that Santander has breached its obligation to treat customers fairly, under the Banking Conduct of Business (BCOB) regulations.

"These regulations set a statutory duty on banks to act fairly," Mr Gander says.

"They are hugely powerful but no-one seems interested in using them."

swatterscars

Hi, thought it may help, I have found an online petition in this regard, and the more signatures the better for the 230,000 businesses who will now have to pay for "free banking".
If anyone is interested, please look at gopetition.com. There are links for signatures, and also to view the comments.

If you really want to make a difference, please please sign this petition, as people power is the only way to get this reversed.

Many thanks

cheapread

ceo@santander.co.uk

Re: Santander reneging on agreement - Free business banking for existing customers

Dear Sir/Madam,
I have been an account holder of Santander and Abbey for several years, attracted by the PROMISE of free business banking within defined limits. One of those limitations was NOT that you nor your Board of Directors could renege on that promise at will. In case you have any problems with the English language – reneging on a promise is called CHEATING and those that practice it are called CADS. Santander’s London address infers conformity with the English system of business – where your word is your bond. Santander’s disgraceful failure to stand by its word is compounded by numerous legacy internet sites still available for all to see, emblazoned by its Logo and the promise of free business banking for life.
I intend to resist this cheat ‘tooth and nail’ right thru the media and the Ombudsman. If all else fails I will of course terminate all accounts with Santander. Currently I have a business account with typically up to £8k monthly and a feeder personal account that is never in debt. I could easily take your business adviser’s suggestion to put this £8k into a deposit account and negate the charges you propose to levy. I have no intention of doing so; -it would signal acquiescence and conformance to mal-practice. Please feel free to continue using my money and that of over 200,000 other SME’s for Santanders’ own investment and in doing so defray any costs that my business account may incur but concomitant to that, be assured of my intention to immediately cease all dealings with Santander if the cheat is invoked.
It may be of mild interest to you and your Board to note that 3 professionals in my family have had enough of bystander apathy with Banking. My wife is closing her Barclays account, one of my daughters is closing her HSBC account and the other is closing her Halifax account.
Libor fiddling / South American drug money laundering / Mis-selling of insurance are not talents we value – we do not cheat in our personal lives and we do not espouse bankers who purport to do it on our behalf. The Nationwide B.S. and Co-Op Bank are more closely aligned to our idea of integrity and even if the deals are not as beneficial as previous accounts, there is a dividing line where ethics supersedes personal gain.

It is a disgrace that during your ‘watch’ you would allow Santander to debase itself and cross this line. Up to now it was admired as a mature and principled Spanish entity and I have recommended it many times on a personal basis and in business networking circles; - ok, it’s a bit quirky but different and fair. I would not do so again, even if you rescinded on this blatant renege. Quixotic is one thing and Santander can sometimes be seen in that light, but your letter and list of proposed charges all to be levied at an indeterminate date is sneaky, disgraceful and reprehensible.

Yours etc.

swatterscars

Brilliant letter Cheapread. Lets hope others take heed and do something about it.

I agree, the letter I have received gives details of the changes. I am quite happy with the account as it is. I dont need "more options". I would be quite happy to leave it as it is.

It is disgraceful to think that a bank of this size and stature will treat its customers this way. If this is how they do business, it will be interesting to see how many of its customers actually leave.

If it is just for financial gain they are charging for this new account, then if they do the math, they will see that by the number of customers leaving because of being charged, that the money lost will far outway the amount of money they receive in charges - hence the "think tank" has got it wrong on this occasion, and the only decent and moral thing to do, is to continue to offer free banking for life.

Lets all hope they "see the light" sooner rather than later.

Victor_Mildrew

swatterscars wrote: »

Hi, thought it may help, I have found an online petition in this regard, and the more signatures the better for the 230,000 businesses who will now have to pay for "free banking".
If anyone is interested, please look at gopetition.com. There are links for signatures, and also to view the comments.

If you really want to make a difference, please please sign this petition, as people power is the only way to get this reversed.

Many thanks

Iv'e found it & signed It.Only 6 sigs to date. Come on everybody!!!

Victor_Mildrew

JuicyJesus wrote: »

I honestly doubt that any complaints handler would simply give you a reference number so you can go to the FOS. What probably happened is they logged a complaint for you and sent out their final response.

Yes that is what I am saying!
The reference number related to the "Final Response" (get stuffed ) letter which they sent me within days.
I was then able to take my complaint to the Ombudsman. The reason I told the complaints handler what I intended to do was to save him having to read to me all of Santander's excuses.

Paulgonnabedebtfree

Victor_Mildrew wrote: »

It's all gone "Very Quiet" :huh: I'm now awaiting my Ombudsman's decision. What about the rest of you????

If Santander don't rescind it by next Friday (they won't), I will be writing to them to request a letter of deadlock.
I didn't see much point writing about it regularly once I had said my bit.
Once I get my letter of deadlock, I will continue from there.

I don't think anyone else has mentoned this but Santander have already had some money, effectively, due to the free banking forever clause. They bought the bank from Abbey and all assets and liabilities would have formed an integral part of the purchase price. A future liability of free business banking forever would (or should) have reduced the purchase price. In effect, they are trying to get the money twice. And if they didn't negotiate the price while taking everything into consideration, their negotiator should be sacked (along with the IT manager but that's another story).

magpiecottage

janusdesign wrote: »

by force, you mean ensure that Santander operates these accounts for free forever... you really believe that ?

They have forced businesses to honour commitments before now.

that being the case, Santander with change the transaction limits... they've done that previously haven't they (don't think current limits are the same as when I joined ten years ago).

Possibly - but if they were seen to be retaliating then it could be argued that it was not an exercise of legitimate commercial judgement.

surely they won't force a bank to offer a service, that I assume is loss making, just because a company it bought had previously used the term "forever" long before it was purchased by Santander.

I think there is a strong argument that the letters from Abbey National confirming it was free forever amount to a collateral contract. If FOS agrees it will almost certainly expect Abbey National to honour it - as indicted by Ombudsman News 50

yes I read what you said about Abbey National being no different from Santander - but I don't know whether that is factually or legally correct.

The proof is here.

magpiecottage

Paulgonnabedebtfree wrote: »

If Santander don't rescind it by next Friday (they won't), I will be writing to them to request a letter of deadlock.

It's called a "Final Response" nowadays - but amounts to the same thing.

A future liability of free business banking forever would (or should) have reduced the purchase price.

It is called due diligence and yes if they did not do it then they should live with the consequences.

However, the Spanish parent is just that, the parent. The UK company is the one your contract is with and the fact that its ownership and name has changed does not change the contract.