Santander free forever bank account changes

amyfairweather

GeoffTF said:

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.

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.

FOS investigators are not the same as an FOS ombudsman; an investigator is the first step in the process, while an ombudsman makes a final, legally binding decision if the parties disagree with the investigator's initial assessment. The investigator makes an initial, non-binding recommendation, while an ombudsman conducts a more senior review if the case is appealed.

There have, to our knowledge so far, been no completed Ombudsman decisions on this matter - only a junior investigators' attempt to sweep the problem (of a large backlog) under the carpet.

Futuristic

Admin on the Facebook group received their response and is escalating it. But don’t hold your breath, expect the same conclusion.

Smurrfmo

The FOS is and always has been a bit of a toothless regulator, afraid in many cases to bite the hand that feeds it.  Even if you accept that argument that Santander's dodgy dealing on the change of terms could wipe out the free forever promise the FOS have to then decide if that is fair.  This behaviour is not something that I think would be viewed as fair by most reasonable people, yet the FOS investigator seems determined to paint it as so.  There is a remedy but alas I think it will not come from the FOS.     

phillw

Section62 said:
The law is quite happy dealing with the concept of "forever"... ever heard of "perpetuity"?

The "This planet will not be here forever" argument is very unlikely to wash with a court - we could all be dead tomorrow (perhaps if the Earth is destroyed by aliens) but that doesn't mean a bank can't offer a 1 year fixed-rate account, because we don't know if we will still be here in 12 months time to see it mature.

If asked, a court is likely to say that for practical purposes 'forever' should be interpreted as something like the lifetime of the customer, or else the continued existence of the company.

They also have a concept of "consideration".

How much money did you pay to have a bank account that was "free forever"?

Section62

phillw said:

Section62 said:
The law is quite happy dealing with the concept of "forever"... ever heard of "perpetuity"?

The "This planet will not be here forever" argument is very unlikely to wash with a court - we could all be dead tomorrow (perhaps if the Earth is destroyed by aliens) but that doesn't mean a bank can't offer a 1 year fixed-rate account, because we don't know if we will still be here in 12 months time to see it mature.

If asked, a court is likely to say that for practical purposes 'forever' should be interpreted as something like the lifetime of the customer, or else the continued existence of the company.

They also have a concept of "consideration".

How much money did you pay to have a bank account that was "free forever"?

Are you suggesting anyone who has a 'free' bank account has no contract with the bank?

Smurrfmo

Section62 said:

phillw said:

Section62 said:
The law is quite happy dealing with the concept of "forever"... ever heard of "perpetuity"?

The "This planet will not be here forever" argument is very unlikely to wash with a court - we could all be dead tomorrow (perhaps if the Earth is destroyed by aliens) but that doesn't mean a bank can't offer a 1 year fixed-rate account, because we don't know if we will still be here in 12 months time to see it mature.

If asked, a court is likely to say that for practical purposes 'forever' should be interpreted as something like the lifetime of the customer, or else the continued existence of the company.

They also have a concept of "consideration".

How much money did you pay to have a bank account that was "free forever"?

Are you suggesting anyone who has a 'free' bank account has no contract with the bank?

And if there is no contract how can they impose any charges?  The consideration doesn't have to be money, in this case it is in things like the customers keeping sometimes large amounts of money in the account on which no interest was paid. 

phillw

Section62 said

Are you suggesting anyone who has a 'free' bank account has no contract with the bank?

What I'm saying is that you didn't give any consideration for free banking in perputity, so I believe they can vary the contract to remove it.

If they started charging some people and not others, then you could argue that they were discriminating.

Tell them you want to make a complaint, get a deadlock letter, take it to the ombudsman. Until then, they can pretty much do what they want.

tsb removed the 5% current account interest, people were getting £50 "go away" money. You might get somewhere if they want to avoid the ombudsman.

A threat to leave is probably not going to be effective, as they will have already factored that in and figured that loss making customers aren't worth keeping.

born_again

phillw said:

Section62 said

Are you suggesting anyone who has a 'free' bank account has no contract with the bank?

What I'm saying is that you didn't give any consideration for free banking in perputity, so I believe they can vary the contract to remove it.

If they started charging some people and not others, then you could argue that they were discriminating.

Tell them you want to make a complaint, get a deadlock letter, take it to the ombudsman. Until then, they can pretty much do what they want.

Which was added after this kicked off years ago. 

phillw

born_again said:

phillw said:.

Which was added after this kicked off years ago. 

Right, I just checked. It has been 13 years since they last tried to remove it and 14 years since the account was made unavailable to new customers.

They are supposedly withdrawing the old accounts entirely from existing customers and replacing them, like they did with the 123 lite accounts.

At some point they have to stop penalising new customers to subsidise old customers. No matter how annoying that is. 

I am always up for making complaints, but it's not something I could get too invested in because for £9.99 there are better things you could do with your time to improve your business

L999

I've read with interest,  I received the same email responce from a junior investigator today at the FOS. I responded saying I wanted it escalated and gave a couple of reasons which seem to be omitted from the "cut and paste, santander response' (that Santander could have written themselves !

Does anyone have any thoughts on taking a claim to the County Court services "Money claims online"? .. for santander renaging on "Free forever" marketing claim for which we entered into when applying and the subsequent acceptance of our business and the opening of the account and then the 20+ years of our business ... and then the subsequent banks effective 'breach of contract" by imposing charges. With the amount being claimed as losses ... based on a (provable) day rate for the time involved in the matter and time to to switch to an alternative free business bank provider? ..