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

Thrugelmir

MattyMatty wrote: »

So I said that once I'd got her reply in writing I'd be going back to the Ombudsman and taking the complaint further.

On what grounds?

kikboy

1. Please sign the petition here.

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/free-banking-with-santander/sign.html#se

2. Copy/modify the letter below (adapted from http://www.mrsblog.co.uk/banks/santander/santander-how-free-is-your-business-banking/) thanks

and email to: [EMAIL="complaints@santander.co.uk"]complaints@santander.co.uk[/EMAIL]

or post to:

Complaints
Santander UK PLC
PO Box 1125
BRADFORD
BD1 9PG

Sirs,

I was sold a free forever bank account. It was advertised to me as a “free forever*” which I understood to mean free i.e. “no charge” and forever i.e. “without end”. I believe any reasonable person would agree with me on this interpretation.

Your advertising made the following statement:

“Many of our competitors business bank accounts are only free for a short time, or require a minimum balance. We only charge you for non-standard services, for details of these charges click here. Or if you exceed our transaction limits. The rest is free. Forever”


[FONT=&quot]The Banking profession is regarded less than favourably for good reason and despite all that has passed it is staggering Santander continues to play fast and loose with its promises. You have a duty of care and a responsibility to treat me fairly. I believe you are not meeting this responsibility. Please adhere and honour the agreement you have made with me. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]I anticipate receive your reply within 8 weeks.[/FONT]

Yours Sincerely


3: Go to Ombudsman after 8 weeks if you are not happy. It will cost them £500.

janusdesign

Personally, I wouldn't waste my time signing the petition... 59 replies? even if it was 5900, it's meaningless...

2) and 3) on the other hand, have some merit.

a petition with 50,000 signatures, or 50,000 writing to complain to Santander and then FOS...? the last two might get a reaction, the first will fall on deaf ears - which is probably why only 59 people have bothered.

Malcolm_Foster_2

Earlier, I sent an Email to the office of the CEO, Santander acknowledging receipt of their final letter stating that they still plan on going ahead to their unilateral changes to my contract with them to provide Free Banking Forever (ie, their intention to charge me £90 p.a. for the privilege of allowing them to make substantial interest on my money deposited with them) and confirming I had made complaints to various sources as a result. I also urged them to ditch this new policy but that a reply was not required.

Although a read acknowledgement was requested with it, I just received a message stating `Deleted without being read'. How's that for customer service? Perhaps some pressure is getting to the recipient ? :rotfl: - [EMAIL="Maria.Charalambous@santander.co.uk"]Maria.Charalambous@santander.co.uk[/EMAIL]

Brett_the_tiler

I have spoken to the FOS today who took the details of my complaint and said they would send me the forms to sign and send back, along with any copies of the original paperwork I had received at the time of opening the account. Can someone please clarify for me, I opened my account at the end of 2006 so to my knowledge I opened the account with santander even though the branch had not been rebranded yet from the abbey.

Is this correct?

I have also found a letter in my welcome pack which states "With the free banking forever* tariff, provided you operate within the specified transaction limits, you need never pay any bank charges again."

The term Free banking forever* is on this letter twice and each is followed with an * (actually its a small number 1 but I can't do that)

So to me the only exception to the free banking forever is the one in the small print that states as follows:-

*Subject to relevant changes in law,regulation or the imposition of any tax in connection with bank charges.

It does not say *Subject to relevant changes in law,regulation or the imposition of any tax in connection with bank charges and if we decide to change our terms and conditions at any time we like.

I'm obviously missing something here and I'm sure someone will point it out, but for the life of me I can't see it.

olddoozer

Brett the Tiler I believe you are correct and I have complained on the same basis.

I raised a complaint by phone and have subsequently received a 'stock' reply going on about how wonderful the new account offering is and regretting if I feel I have been "miss-sold" the account. I have replied pointing out that it is not a case of miss-selling but of Santander reneging on the free banking FOREVER promise in their marketing material, account welcome letter and user guide. I have given them 21 days to confirm that they will now fully comply with the terms of the contract that was entered into when the account was opened and suggesting that, as contract law requires the agreement of all relevant parties, the imposition of any new charge would be illegal without my agreement. Next step Banking Ombudsman, Trading Standards, FSA & MP.

Thanks also to Malcolm Foster for posting the CEO's email address. Maybe if all 230,000(?) of us "Free Forever" business account holders email her that will up the pressure a bit more

magpiecottage

If you look here, you will find the basis for making a complaint - and links both the evidence and a part completed FOS form (which will download) and open in MS Word or similar.

brookhouse

According to their website you can complain in a branch. So why not go in at a busy time and talk in a loud voice

If you're a shareholder write to the chairman, Lord Burns

http://www.aboutsantander.co.uk/about-us/directors-non-executive/lord-burns.aspx

magpiecottage

kikboy wrote: »

1. Please sign the petition here.

I agree with Janusdesign. A petition is one document and will be ignored. It also does not really address the real concern. Individual complaints followed, by those who can, with complaints to FOS will be far more effective.

email to: [EMAIL="complaints@santander.co.uk"]complaints@santander.co.uk[/EMAIL]

or post to:

Complaints
Santander UK PLC
PO Box 1125
BRADFORD
BD1 9PG

That is correct.

Your advertising made the following statement:

“Many of our competitors business bank accounts are only free for a short time, or require a minimum balance. We only charge you for non-standard services, for details of these charges click here. Or if you exceed our transaction limits. The rest is free. Forever”

If it did say that it is pretty devastating - but only if you also provide the evidence.

[FONT=&quot]The Banking profession is regarded less than favourably for good reason and despite all that has passed it is staggering Santander continues to play fast and loose with its promises.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]This is irrelevant to your complaint.

You have a duty of care and a responsibility to treat me fairly. I believe you are not meeting this responsibility. Please adhere and honour the agreement you have made with me.

Strictly it is with your business. However, they are in breach of FSA Principle 6.
[/FONT]

Yours Sincerely

Should be "Yours faithfully" if it is not addressed to a named individual but not really important.

Go to Ombudsman after 8 weeks if you are not happy. It will cost them £500.

You can only do that if the assets and turnover of your business are below €2 million and you have nine or fewer employees.

You should also not intimate that you will use the fee to blackmail Santander.

magpiecottage

One of the issues that did concern me was what is known as the consideration. For a contract to exist, there must be not only a an offer and an acceptance but a consideration for money or money's worth.

Wikepedia has a page telling us of the case of Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company in which Lord Justice Linley said "It has been argued that this is nudum pactum - that there is no consideration. We must apply to that argument the usual legal tests. Let us see whether there is no advantage to the defendants. It is said that the use of the ball is no advantage to them, and that what benefits them is the sale; and the case is put that a lot of these balls might be stolen, and that it would be no advantage to the defendants if the thief or other people used them. The answer to that, I think, is as follows. It is quite obvious that in the view of the advertisers a use by the public of their remedy, if they can only get the public to have confidence enough to use it, will react and produce a sale which is directly beneficial to them. Therefore, the advertisers get out of the use an advantage which is enough to constitute a consideration."

In our case, the consideration is that Santander, or Abbey National as it then was, has the use of our money. Even thought it pays us interest on it, the fact remains that it is able to use our money more cheaply than it would if it raised funds elsewhere.