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

Victor_Mildrew

janusdesign wrote: »

someone previously mentioned a fourth option of a "Business Instant Access Deposit A/C" with Santander... it's obviously not a current account but a savings account, so you won't get a chequebook - but you would get a card to access the ATM... whether you could use it to receive online payments from clients, I don't know - it's almost implied, but perhaps someone who has setup an account can confirm... I don't think you can deposit cheques or cash in-branch with this a/c, so they'd have to be posted or via ATM.

You can deposit cheques & cash in the Branch internal ATM (No envelopes reqd) & you can make or receive any online payments.Debit card or chequebook not allowed but they currently pay interest on balance.

Victor_Mildrew

Victor_Mildrew wrote: »

True I wasn't thinking straight;). Could this then be the answer for most of us. The only difference I can see is no cheque book , Debit card or Direct Debits, You can still make "Faster Payments" to people, pay bills,pay in cash or cheques & draw out willy-nilly(online or via ATM) + you get 1% on the Balance.
I opened one in 10mins yesterday eve by phone, it was all working immediately & have already tried all functions except the ATM which I am assured will work.(I had to contact customer service to have my present card linked) .I intend to run both accounts & ditch the current account if charges are forced upon us. But I still intend to fight to the Death:beer:
I DO believe it Margaret!

A BIG THANK YOU TO "keithwjones"&"navman2860" FOR TELLING US ABOUT THIS!!

See above for my earlier post.

Colin2511

would just like to say a big THANK-You :T to everyone that has posted on here.

I have not received any notification from the bank and was not aware of anything until I read this.

I use the bank mainly for paying in a few small cheques a month, and then usually transfer this accross to our main business bank with Barclays (so I dont have to pay for paying in cheques)...

(used to use them for all our business banking, but they made two errors that cost me money, and caused a lot of hassle so I moved most of it) :mad:

I was told that I would be informed in "due course" about the changes...and no date had been given apart from before the end of the year, and I would get 60 days notice...

SO...BIG THANKS...to everyone on the MSE board for alerting me to this, and giving me the heads up even if my bank could not manage it

BusinessIsBusiness

Colin2511 wrote: »

would just like to say a big THANK-You :T to everyone that has posted on here.

I have not received any notification from the bank and was not aware of anything until I read this.

I use the bank mainly for paying in a few small cheques a month, and then usually transfer this accross to our main business bank with Barclays (so I dont have to pay for paying in cheques)...

(used to use them for all our business banking, but they made two errors that cost me money, and caused a lot of hassle so I moved most of it) :mad:

I was told that I would be informed in "due course" about the changes...and no date had been given apart from before the end of the year, and I would get 60 days notice...

SO...BIG THANKS...to everyone on the MSE board for alerting me to this, and giving me the heads up even if my bank could not manage it

The bank will inform you. Rather than informing 230k people in one go, it is sensibly sending the letters out in batches. So when you do call in there wont be another 229,999 people trying to call at the same time to close the account.. :eek:

magpiecottage

I think my wife and I might write each other 100 cheques for a penny each before closing the accounts!

Crimson1

Like others on here I received Santander's standard letter advising of this £7.50pcm charge. I phoned and complained and registered a formal complaint. I have just received what looks like a standard reply and enclosing Ombudsman Service leaflet. I've now downloaded and completed the Ombudsman form and sent it off with relevant extracts from their Ts & C's and promtional literature privided at that time.

The essential points as I see it are:

Free banking forever was an expressed term of the original contract and was given such prominence that the words on page 2 said "Free business banking Not for 12 months, 18 months, or ever two years..." On pages 3 and 4 the only words were "but forever". So my point is, this was the USP of the account and given enormous emphasis in their promotional literature.

As others have indicated on page 6 it stated "- then you'll enjoy free current account banking forever. That's guaranteed, unless there are are any changes to the law or to banking regulations, or any new taxes relating to bank charges". So the only circumstances mentioned in the booklet permitting them to change the "forever" promise did not apply.

If Santander (they took over the Abbey business and must honour its contracts) did not intend for the "forever" term to mean just that they could have for example said for a particular term, e.g. 5 years, renewable thereafter on an annual basis.

In my view Santanderhas breached its obligation to treat customers fairly, under the Banking Conduct of Business(BCOB) regulations. According to the Banking: Conduct of Business sourcebook (BCOBS) Section 2.2.5 states:

“Acommunication or a financial promotion should not describe a feature of a product or service as"guaranteed", "protected" or "secure", or use asimilar term unless:

(1) that term is capable of being a fair,clear and not misleading description of it; and

(2) the firm communicates allof the information necessary, and presents that information with sufficientclarity and prominence, to make the use of that term fair, clear and notmisleading.”

It is my understanding that the bank should not have used the word “forever” here as it was not fair and was misleading due to the plannedchange in terms.

Additionally S. 5.1.1 of the BCOBS states:

“A firm must provide aservice in relation to a retail banking service which is prompt, efficient and fair to a banking customer and which has regard to any communications or financial promotion made by the firm to the banking customer from time to time.”

The bank is in breach of this clause since it did not provide a service which is fair to a banking customer and which has regard to any communications or financial promotion made by the firm to the banking customer.

Malcolm_Foster_2

I am about to send the following letter to Santander and if anyone feels able to advise on its content, if anything is amiss, I would be most grateful. I am also grateful to all who have been posting such useful information concerning this dispute.

[FONT=&quot] Subject – Proposed Bank A/c Charges (By Recorded Delivery)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Dear Mr Tetlow,[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Thank you for your letters of 17.08.12 & 20/08/12 in response to my complaint regarding the planned changes to my account T&C involving the levying of a £90 p.a. charge. This account was chosen by me based on your (Abbey National, as then) heavily advertised promise of `Free Banking Forever’ which constitutes the basis for our contract.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I have to say that this unilateral and unwelcome change to our contact is NOT acceptable to me and that, in accordance with the law as established in Carlill v The Carbolic Smoke Ball Company (Lord Justice Linley), I do not permit Santander to debit the account for a monthly fee. I also believe that Santander would be breaching its obligations to treat customers fairly, under the Banking Conduct of Business(BCOB) regulations.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Other similar cases :-[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Evans & Sons Ltd v Andrea Merzario Ltd (Lord Denning)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd v. Selfridge & Co. Ltd [1915] AC 847 (Lord Dunedin)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]-also lead me to understand that such a change would be unlawful.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Any attempt by Santander to do so will, by my understanding, amount to an unauthorised payment in which case I will demand that the payment is reversed in accordance with FSA rule BCOBS 5.1.11R(2).[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I note that an earlier communication (Email) by myself about this complaint to:-[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Complaints.ChairmanCB@santander.co.uk[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]-was apparently deleted and not read (despite my read acknowledgment request) on 24.08.12 by a Maria Charalambous, which I do not consider to be very good customer service, hence this recorded delivery.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Yours faithfully,[/FONT]

Thrugelmir

magpiecottage wrote: »

I think my wife and I might write each other 100 cheques for a penny each before closing the accounts!

and you run a consultancy business...:eek:

magpiecottage

Thrugelmir wrote: »

and you run a consultancy business...:eek:

Yes

And I am also known to make the odd jest!

magpiecottage

I think, Malcolm, your letter is good - though you must assume Tetlow is the monkey rather than the organ grinder.

I wouldn't bother with Recorded Delivery, though. In my experience Royal Mail seldom, if ever, gets the signature matched to the letter and so it amounts to evidence that it didn't arrive.

Proof of posting (free from the Post Office) should be sufficient. FOS will, if necessary, assume it was delivered two working days later if delivered first class.

I had an e-mail from somebody who was very involved in the Equitable Life claims a few years ago. She was told by Santander that it was not commercially viable. That was what Equitable said - and the court told them they had to honour their commitments anyway.

The Carbolic Smoke Ball Company faced a similar fate - but could not persuade the Court of Appeal that it should not fulfil its contractual obligations.

Put simply, if we all make clear that we will use BCOBS 5.1.11 and then do so - following on to FOS each and every time if we have to - I think Santander might get the message that if it thinks honouring its contracts with us is expensive then it should look carefully at the cost of not honouring them.