Santander free forever bank account changes

Smurrfmo

There is more misinformation in this thread than the Santander letter explaining why they were reneging on their promise.  Of course it should be tested in court, if the issue is as simple as many of Santander's fervent advocates here suggest then it shouldn't have any problem winning the case.

Smurrfmo

My opinion on some of the arguments user by the FOS investigator to justify his extremely shonky decision:

The free forever promise did not form part of the contract: complete nonsense, a promise does not have to be in "terms and conditions" to be binding

Santander could simply have closed the accounts: they didn't but instead chose to charge, so of no relevance and nonsense

The original terms allowed Santander to apply charges to the free forever accounts: the height of nonsense, I think he just made this bit up as there is no support for it anywhere

The banking system, laws, regulations have changed so Santander can use the original caveats to the promise: Santander have not used this argument themselves, maybe because it is a nonsensical non-starter.

Whether the 2015 terms could override the free forever promise or that is a core, entrenched term: now we are at the heart of the matter, this is the sum total of Santander's case and a court will decide this, not a lay person

Futuristic

Smurrfmo said:

My opinion on some of the arguments user by the FOS investigator to justify his extremely shonky decision:

The free forever promise did not form part of the contract: complete nonsense, a promise does not have to be in "terms and conditions" to be binding

[...]

Whether the 2015 terms could override the free forever promise or that is a core, entrenched term: now we are at the heart of the matter, this is the sum total of Santander's case and a court will decide this, not a lay person

Can you specify the relevant laws that state this for B2B activity? Serious question, I understand consumers may have such protection.

It was simply marketing and nothing in the terms stated the accounts would actually be free forever? Businesses are expected to understand contracts and there is no requirement for "clear" documents like consumers. 

Also what would you expect to "win" from the case? One would expect almost certainly they would close your account down with the required notice regardless of the decision.

I look forward to your court case (I bet you never get to that point).

Smurrfmo

The law of contract is a very interesting study even for the lay person and I'd strongly recommend a little light reading to anyone interested.  There are several ingredients needed to form a contract, of which the most important are offer, acceptance and consideration.  Without question all of these elements are satisfied in the free forever promise.  To state otherwise would be extremely ignorant and I'm sure not even Santander will do that. They will inevitably have to fall back on the argument that the 2015 terms cancelled the promise and the judge will have to decide whether those terms could ever override the promise.  Anybody claiming to know what a judge would decide is usually a fool but I look forward to making the case.

Am1471

I don't seem to have been charged the £10 a month fees yet I was expecting.  Anyone else?

Smurrfmo

Am1471 said:

I don't seem to have been charged the £10 a month fees yet I was expecting.  Anyone else?

Nothing charged here but I have heard they charge end of month, so we will see.

GeoffTF

I do not consider myself to be a Santander fan, but this is an interesting drama nonetheless. I have looked at the statistics, and Santander seems to be distinguished only by its averageness. It does not appear to be especially good or bad at anything.

I have personal accounts with Santander and Nationwide. I am not having problems with either bank. Both accounts work. I have no reason to move from either of them. Nationwide is the more popular bank. I have not used the branch service of either bank in recent years, but I have poked my nose into the local branches a few times. Nationwide seems to offer the better branch service. It also has better hand outs.

I expect that Nationwide would be the better choice for most people. Nonetheless, different people have different requirements. Nationwide probably will not appeal to Monzo or Coutts customers. Santander and Coutts seem to have the best record for entertaining disputes.

Zanderman

GeoffTF said:

I do not consider myself to be a Santander fan, but this is an interesting drama nonetheless. I have looked at the statistics, and Santander seems to be distinguished only by its averageness. It does not appear to be especially good or bad at anything.

I have personal accounts with Santander and Nationwide. I am not having problems with either bank. Both accounts work. I have no reason to move from either of them. Nationwide is the more popular bank. I have not used the branch service of either bank in recent years, but I have poked my nose into the local branches a few times. Nationwide seems to offer the better branch service. It also has better hand outs.

I expect that Nationwide would be the better choice for most people. Nonetheless, different people have different requirements. Nationwide probably will not appeal to Monzo or Coutts customers. Santander and Coutts seem to have the best record for entertaining disputes.

Not sure why you're suggesting Nationwide or banking in general. This thread is specifically about Santander's 'free for ever' business account, not their offerings in general.

Nationwide (not actually a bank) don't even offer business current accounts, so are not, actually, a good alternative for Santander business customers! 

However Nationwide's purchase of Virgin does mean they offer business accounts via Virgin, but that's via Virgin.

GeoffTF

Zanderman said:

GeoffTF said:

I do not consider myself to be a Santander fan, but this is an interesting drama nonetheless. I have looked at the statistics, and Santander seems to be distinguished only by its averageness. It does not appear to be especially good or bad at anything.

I have personal accounts with Santander and Nationwide. I am not having problems with either bank. Both accounts work. I have no reason to move from either of them. Nationwide is the more popular bank. I have not used the branch service of either bank in recent years, but I have poked my nose into the local branches a few times. Nationwide seems to offer the better branch service. It also has better hand outs.

I expect that Nationwide would be the better choice for most people. Nonetheless, different people have different requirements. Nationwide probably will not appeal to Monzo or Coutts customers. Santander and Coutts seem to have the best record for entertaining disputes.

Not sure why you're suggesting Nationwide or banking in general. This thread is specifically about Santander's 'free for ever' business account, not their offerings in general.

Nationwide (not actually a bank) don't even offer business current accounts, so are not, actually, a good alternative for Santander business customers! 

However Nationwide's purchase of Virgin does mean they offer business accounts via Virgin, but that's via Virgin.

Our comments are being dismissed because we are said to be "Santander fanboys". I am saying that is not true in my case. I am not a particular fan of Santander, and I do not have a business account. I am just an impartial observer. I expect that the same applies to others here.

The FOS is finding in favour of Santander. I do not expect that Santander would have introduced the charges if it was not confident of its legal position. Nonetheless, we seem to have lots of broken records saying "but it is free forever". Probably they are just plain wrong, but we do not know the details of why.

Smurrfmo

A reminder that we do not yet have a FOS "decision" as only an Ombudsman can make a decision.  What we have are investigator "opinions" at best.  The unwillingness of a complainer to push it to a decision does not mean the investigator's opinion is a decision.  There are many previous cases where Ombudsmen have not followed the opinions of their investigators.