Santander free forever bank account changes

OblongHead

I have an active complaint with Santander about the old Abbey National “Free Banking Forever” business account. My case has gone through the first FOS investigation stage and is now escalated to an Ombudsman for a full decision, which they say takes six to twelve weeks.

For others going through the same process, this is what has happened so far.

Santander applied a £9.99 charge to my account on 11 October 2025. The account balance was zero at the time, so their fee pushed the account into an unarranged overdraft. I sent them a written notice pointing out that a firm cannot apply disputed fees while a FOS case is open, and they reversed the charge the next day. The account is back at zero.

The FOS investigator did not uphold my complaint. The main reasons were that Santander described the promise of free banking as marketing material, the bank refers to general variation rights in the old terms, and the investigator said that because I continued using the account after 2015 this can be treated as acceptance of any changes they made. The investigator did not treat the 2012 letter that reaffirmed Free Banking Forever as a binding commitment. This seems to be happening to a number of people because very few can prove whether they did or did not receive a particular letter ten years ago.

I rejected the investigator’s view and asked for an Ombudsman review. My challenge focused on the points many of us share:

• Santander reaffirmed Free Banking Forever in writing in 2012, after an earlier attempt to remove it.
• A specific lifetime guarantee cannot be removed silently by a general variation clause.
• The bank has not provided evidence that they gave clear and prominent notice that the lifetime status was ending in 2015.
• Continued use of an account is not valid consent if the customer had no idea the key feature was removed.
• A lifetime guarantee does not expire simply because time has passed.

I kept my reply concise and factual, which seems to work best with FOS escalation teams.

If you are preparing your own complaint or escalation, it helps to focus on these core points rather than the wider history. The FOS process for this type of dispute seems to turn on evidence of what was promised, what was reaffirmed, and whether any clear notice was given that the promise was being removed.

Happy to share updates when the Ombudsman decision arrives.

eskbanker

OblongHead said:

I sent them a written notice pointing out that a firm cannot apply disputed fees while a FOS case is open...

Out of curiosity, what are you relying on to support this?  FOS states in its business guidance:

While we’re dealing with the complaint

While we consider a complaint, you can continue to deal with your customer as normal. But if anything you do is relevant to the complaint, or you want to make an offer to resolve things, you should let us know. 

We’re likely to recommend that you wait until we’ve finished investigating the complaint before you take any related legal action (such as proceedings to recover a debt).

You should tell us about any action you’re thinking of taking.

but that wording falls some way short of a firm statement that a firm cannot apply fees, so is that sourced from somewhere else, such as the FCA handbook perhaps?

OblongHead

When a fee is the subject of an active FOS complaint, the bank is expected to treat that fee as formally disputed. The FCA does not use the exact phrase “you cannot apply a fee”, but several rules together create that effect. This is why banks usually reverse any charge that relates to the dispute until the case is closed.

Here is what it relies on:

1. FCA DISP 1.6 – complaint handling rules
Banks must not take action that causes unfair detriment while a complaint is open. Applying or enforcing the very fee you are complaining about is treated as unfair because the disagreement has not been resolved.

2. FCA CONC rules on disputed sums
Although these rules apply mainly to credit, the same principle is used across all regulated complaints: a firm must not treat a disputed amount as a debt or enforce it until the complaint has been settled. Letting a disputed fee push an account into an overdraft is treated as enforcement.

3. FCA Principles 6 and 7 (Treating Customers Fairly and Clear Communication)
FOS routinely applies these. Charging a fee that is being challenged, or causing negative balance entries while the matter is under review, is neither fair nor clear.

4. FOS’s own expectations
In practice, the Ombudsman expects firms to pause or reverse fees that form part of a live complaint. It avoids creating new harm before a decision is made. When reminded of this, most banks simply reverse the fee, which is exactly what happened in my case.

In short:
Banks should not charge or enforce a fee that is the subject of a FOS complaint because it is formally in dispute, and doing so risks breaching FCA complaint handling and fairness rules. That is why I challenged the £9.99 and it was reversed.

bob9900

Smurrfmo said:

dunnowot said:

Smurrfmo said:

Has anybody had a charge applied to their account yet?  Nothing showing on mine.

Did you actually use the account?  Could the charge be triggered only on a transaction going through?  I've not used the account at all and my balance is less than £1 and I haven't received one either.

Yes, it is in regular use.  Still no charge, which is frustrating as I'm keen to get going on legal action.

I've been watching the thread with interest, I have also not received an email notifying me of the charge but when I logged onto my account, under the 'statements and documents' tab there is a letter there notifying me of the charge to be taken in December. it might be worth you checking?

Thats me jumping ship, already moved my other accounts, this one will be next.
 

eskbanker

OblongHead said:

When a fee is the subject of an active FOS complaint, the bank is expected to treat that fee as formally disputed. The FCA does not use the exact phrase “you cannot apply a fee”, but several rules together create that effect. This is why banks usually reverse any charge that relates to the dispute until the case is closed.

Here is what it relies on:

1. FCA DISP 1.6 – complaint handling rules
Banks must not take action that causes unfair detriment while a complaint is open. Applying or enforcing the very fee you are complaining about is treated as unfair because the disagreement has not been resolved.

2. FCA CONC rules on disputed sums
Although these rules apply mainly to credit, the same principle is used across all regulated complaints: a firm must not treat a disputed amount as a debt or enforce it until the complaint has been settled. Letting a disputed fee push an account into an overdraft is treated as enforcement.

3. FCA Principles 6 and 7 (Treating Customers Fairly and Clear Communication)
FOS routinely applies these. Charging a fee that is being challenged, or causing negative balance entries while the matter is under review, is neither fair nor clear.

4. FOS’s own expectations
In practice, the Ombudsman expects firms to pause or reverse fees that form part of a live complaint. It avoids creating new harm before a decision is made. When reminded of this, most banks simply reverse the fee, which is exactly what happened in my case.

In short:
Banks should not charge or enforce a fee that is the subject of a FOS complaint because it is formally in dispute, and doing so risks breaching FCA complaint handling and fairness rules. That is why I challenged the £9.99 and it was reversed.

Thanks for sharing your workings - some of it seems a bit tenuous to me rather than being conclusive, but if it was enough to persuade Santander to suspend charging you then job done, although perhaps the fact that the fee put you into unarranged overdraft may also have influenced their actions.

Have other posters with live FOS complaints experienced the same?

GlitterMedusa

I requested my account to be closed on September 29th, it's still open but no charges showing. They were supposed to close it within a month of the request being made, so now I have to waste time chasing this up

masca

I too had to chase Santander multiple times to get my business account closed, and I too have a complaint in with the Omdurman!

thedean1999

OblongHead said:

I have an active complaint with Santander about the old Abbey National “Free Banking Forever” business account. My case has gone through the first FOS investigation stage and is now escalated to an Ombudsman for a full decision, which they say takes six to twelve weeks.

For others going through the same process, this is what has happened so far.

Santander applied a £9.99 charge to my account on 11 October 2025. The account balance was zero at the time, so their fee pushed the account into an unarranged overdraft. I sent them a written notice pointing out that a firm cannot apply disputed fees while a FOS case is open, and they reversed the charge the next day. The account is back at zero.

The FOS investigator did not uphold my complaint. The main reasons were that Santander described the promise of free banking as marketing material, the bank refers to general variation rights in the old terms, and the investigator said that because I continued using the account after 2015 this can be treated as acceptance of any changes they made. The investigator did not treat the 2012 letter that reaffirmed Free Banking Forever as a binding commitment. This seems to be happening to a number of people because very few can prove whether they did or did not receive a particular letter ten years ago.

I rejected the investigator’s view and asked for an Ombudsman review. My challenge focused on the points many of us share:

• Santander reaffirmed Free Banking Forever in writing in 2012, after an earlier attempt to remove it.
• A specific lifetime guarantee cannot be removed silently by a general variation clause.
• The bank has not provided evidence that they gave clear and prominent notice that the lifetime status was ending in 2015.
• Continued use of an account is not valid consent if the customer had no idea the key feature was removed.
• A lifetime guarantee does not expire simply because time has passed.

I kept my reply concise and factual, which seems to work best with FOS escalation teams.

If you are preparing your own complaint or escalation, it helps to focus on these core points rather than the wider history. The FOS process for this type of dispute seems to turn on evidence of what was promised, what was reaffirmed, and whether any clear notice was given that the promise was being removed.

Happy to share updates when the Ombudsman decision arrives.

Thank you for sharing. I have been toying about whether to escalate or just move my account (but it will be a pain to do so).

In particular I am concerned that if the case takes ages to be resolved will I be on the hook for the fees that would have been charged in the interim? ie though they have not applied the charges, will they be able to apply the charges backdated to the date of the first one if the ombudsman finds in their favour?

MeteredOut

thedean1999 said:

OblongHead said:

I have an active complaint with Santander about the old Abbey National “Free Banking Forever” business account. My case has gone through the first FOS investigation stage and is now escalated to an Ombudsman for a full decision, which they say takes six to twelve weeks.

For others going through the same process, this is what has happened so far.

Santander applied a £9.99 charge to my account on 11 October 2025. The account balance was zero at the time, so their fee pushed the account into an unarranged overdraft. I sent them a written notice pointing out that a firm cannot apply disputed fees while a FOS case is open, and they reversed the charge the next day. The account is back at zero.

The FOS investigator did not uphold my complaint. The main reasons were that Santander described the promise of free banking as marketing material, the bank refers to general variation rights in the old terms, and the investigator said that because I continued using the account after 2015 this can be treated as acceptance of any changes they made. The investigator did not treat the 2012 letter that reaffirmed Free Banking Forever as a binding commitment. This seems to be happening to a number of people because very few can prove whether they did or did not receive a particular letter ten years ago.

I rejected the investigator’s view and asked for an Ombudsman review. My challenge focused on the points many of us share:

• Santander reaffirmed Free Banking Forever in writing in 2012, after an earlier attempt to remove it.
• A specific lifetime guarantee cannot be removed silently by a general variation clause.
• The bank has not provided evidence that they gave clear and prominent notice that the lifetime status was ending in 2015.
• Continued use of an account is not valid consent if the customer had no idea the key feature was removed.
• A lifetime guarantee does not expire simply because time has passed.

I kept my reply concise and factual, which seems to work best with FOS escalation teams.

If you are preparing your own complaint or escalation, it helps to focus on these core points rather than the wider history. The FOS process for this type of dispute seems to turn on evidence of what was promised, what was reaffirmed, and whether any clear notice was given that the promise was being removed.

Happy to share updates when the Ombudsman decision arrives.

Thank you for sharing. I have been toying about whether to escalate or just move my account (but it will be a pain to do so).

In particular I am concerned that if the case takes ages to be resolved will I be on the hook for the fees that would have been charged in the interim? ie though they have not applied the charges, will they be able to apply the charges backdated to the date of the first one if the ombudsman finds in their favour?

The obvious answer is legally, yes they could, if the Ombudsman's decision determines the T&Cs that allowed for the introduction of a fee outweigh the misleading "free forever" marketing and those T&Cs were implicitly accepted by customers.

Whether Santander would chase for those fees is a different thing and each individual should weigh up the risk. But, I've seen a lot of comments of "I'm going to go to the Ombudsman just to cost Santander £450", so perhaps Santander will do likewise and just pass those fees onto a debt collector.