Santander free forever bank account changes

robatwork

eskbanker said:

robatwork said:

Been following this thread with interest, as a very long time customer of Santander who thinks they've done the dirty to many small business owners over this.

Here's my take on how these things always seem to work out. Nobody will go to court, and this thread will fizzle out.

Feel free to correct me as and when.

It would surprise me if nobody went to court - talk is obviously cheap so it'll be a subset of those who got a final FOS decision, which is a subset of those who went to FOS, which is a subset of those who complained to Santander, which is a subset of those who are affected, but even though the numbers diminish at each stage, it's unlikely to be zero who'll take a punt on a legal claim IMHO.

I really hope someone has their day in court - hopefully the poster on the thread here who has said they'll see it through to the end. And updates us with the outcome. But I've seen this on similar threads many times and the talk wasn't just cheap, it was free forever. 

Smurrfmo

As I have said before I will be issuing proceedings when I have completed the sham process that the FOS seems to consist of.  I have had the cut and paste opinion from Investigator In Name Only and waiting for an Ombudsman to get involved.  The legal analysis from In Name Only really did live up to their name, a person on their first day of contract law at University would know more about how contracts are formed and what they can consist of.  When informed of the fact that they did not actually respond to any of the points I raised they clammed up with nothing further to add. The cut and paste clearly did not allow for any challenge.  I'm not saying the courts get everything right, far from it, but any judge will understand that terms and conditions relating to a product do not all have to be in a document headed terms and conditions.  Anybody not grasping this elementary point should not be an investigator in a consumer rights organisation.  I will keep people posted on here of progress, especially the Santander cheerleaders!

MeteredOut

Smurrfmo said:

As I have said before I will be issuing proceedings when I have completed the sham process that the FOS seems to consist of.  I have had the cut and paste opinion from Investigator In Name Only and waiting for an Ombudsman to get involved.  The legal analysis from In Name Only really did live up to their name, a person on their first day of contract law at University would know more about how contracts are formed and what they can consist of.  When informed of the fact that they did not actually respond to any of the points I raised they clammed up with nothing further to add. The cut and paste clearly did not allow for any challenge.  I'm not saying the courts get everything right, far from it, but any judge will understand that terms and conditions relating to a product do not all have to be in a document headed terms and conditions.  Anybody not grasping this elementary point should not be an investigator in a consumer rights organisation.  I will keep people posted on here of progress, especially the Santander cheerleaders!

I'm interested in who you think the Santander cheerleaders on here are. I appreciate its much easier to be passive aggressive and just throw out a verbal side-swipe, but I'd suggest you'd make a better point by challenging their cheerleading.

sheramber

Smurrfmo said:

As I have said before I will be issuing proceedings when I have completed the sham process that the FOS seems to consist of.  I have had the cut and paste opinion from Investigator In Name Only and waiting for an Ombudsman to get involved.  The legal analysis from In Name Only really did live up to their name, a person on their first day of contract law at University would know more about how contracts are formed and what they can consist of.  When informed of the fact that they did not actually respond to any of the points I raised they clammed up with nothing further to add. The cut and paste clearly did not allow for any challenge.  I'm not saying the courts get everything right, far from it, but any judge will understand that terms and conditions relating to a product do not all have to be in a document headed terms and conditions.  Anybody not grasping this elementary point should not be an investigator in a consumer rights organisation.  I will keep people posted on here of progress, especially the Santander cheerleaders!

If you think so little of the FOS why waste time with them? 

Why not go to court now?

MeteredOut

sheramber said:

Smurrfmo said:

As I have said before I will be issuing proceedings when I have completed the sham process that the FOS seems to consist of.  I have had the cut and paste opinion from Investigator In Name Only and waiting for an Ombudsman to get involved.  The legal analysis from In Name Only really did live up to their name, a person on their first day of contract law at University would know more about how contracts are formed and what they can consist of.  When informed of the fact that they did not actually respond to any of the points I raised they clammed up with nothing further to add. The cut and paste clearly did not allow for any challenge.  I'm not saying the courts get everything right, far from it, but any judge will understand that terms and conditions relating to a product do not all have to be in a document headed terms and conditions.  Anybody not grasping this elementary point should not be an investigator in a consumer rights organisation.  I will keep people posted on here of progress, especially the Santander cheerleaders!

If you think so little of the FOS why waste time with them? 

Why not go to court now?

I believe the thinking is that it is best to be seen, by the court, to have exhausted formal complaint processes before turning legal.

boingy

Smurrfmo said:

As I have said before I will be issuing proceedings when I have completed the sham process that the FOS seems to consist of.  I have had the cut and paste opinion from Investigator In Name Only and waiting for an Ombudsman to get involved.  The legal analysis from In Name Only really did live up to their name, a person on their first day of contract law at University would know more about how contracts are formed and what they can consist of.  When informed of the fact that they did not actually respond to any of the points I raised they clammed up with nothing further to add. The cut and paste clearly did not allow for any challenge.  I'm not saying the courts get everything right, far from it, but any judge will understand that terms and conditions relating to a product do not all have to be in a document headed terms and conditions.  Anybody not grasping this elementary point should not be an investigator in a consumer rights organisation.  I will keep people posted on here of progress, especially the Santander cheerleaders!

Can I ask what sum of money you will be claiming and how you calculated it?

Smurrfmo

boingy said:

Smurrfmo said:

As I have said before I will be issuing proceedings when I have completed the sham process that the FOS seems to consist of.  I have had the cut and paste opinion from Investigator In Name Only and waiting for an Ombudsman to get involved.  The legal analysis from In Name Only really did live up to their name, a person on their first day of contract law at University would know more about how contracts are formed and what they can consist of.  When informed of the fact that they did not actually respond to any of the points I raised they clammed up with nothing further to add. The cut and paste clearly did not allow for any challenge.  I'm not saying the courts get everything right, far from it, but any judge will understand that terms and conditions relating to a product do not all have to be in a document headed terms and conditions.  Anybody not grasping this elementary point should not be an investigator in a consumer rights organisation.  I will keep people posted on here of progress, especially the Santander cheerleaders!

Can I ask what sum of money you will be claiming and how you calculated it?

The purpose of damages following a contract breach is to place the innocent party in the position they would be in if the contract had been performed, to compensate for "loss of of bargain".   I will be claiming my expectation damages arising from Santander's breach of contract.  Although in practice there is no limit I expect the court might allow something like 10 years.  There is a duty to mitigate any losses but no actual way of doing so, I am not required to open another account elsewhere and move away from Santander.  Of course I could lose but the downside is fairly minimal and at least I will get a legal decision that is based on contract law, unlike the complete nonsense put out to date by the FOS.  

MeteredOut

Has anyone progressed with a small claims court claim submission yet?

born_again

Or more to the point has anyone had a reply from onwardsman, rather than the 1st line. Which they did not like the reply that Santander had done nothing wrong.

eskbanker

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81902449#Comment_81902449

That doesn't seem to be more to the point - it's old news that there have been a number of FOS decisions published (i.e. from actual ombudsmen rather than adjudicators), and last month I posted some links on the previous page, so it's logical to now consider how many have taken things to the next stage, i.e. court.