Santander free forever bank account changes

subjecttocontract

clairec666 said:

MellowJello said:

Government need to step in, not just.lolotely ask to reconsider. Doubt they will pile on any pressure. Santander should not be allowed to renege on the deal, especially not in the current financial climate where many are struggling financially. From 'free for ever' to £9.99 a month is a huge hike and I don't know any other 'organisation' that would be permitted to do such a thing.

I know it's been mentioned already, but don't close any accounts yet, you're unlikely to be able to get it back if Santander are forced to back down - ......

That's not necessarily true. If it goes as far as court action, the ruling might be that everyone affected is reimbursed......including those who have closed accounts and incurred costs.

MeteredOut

MellowJello said:

Government need to step in, not just.lolotely ask to reconsider. Doubt they will pile on any pressure. Santander should not be allowed to renege on the deal, especially not in the current financial climate where many are struggling financially. From 'free for ever' to £9.99 a month is a huge hike and I don't know any other 'organisation' that would be permitted to do such a thing.

What do you want the government to do?

eskbanker

MeteredOut said:

MellowJello said:

Government need to step in, not just.lolotely ask to reconsider. Doubt they will pile on any pressure. Santander should not be allowed to renege on the deal, especially not in the current financial climate where many are struggling financially. From 'free for ever' to £9.99 a month is a huge hike and I don't know any other 'organisation' that would be permitted to do such a thing.

What do you want the government to do?

Parliamentary intervention is undoubtedly a potential outcome if the matter gains enough traction, in the same way that TSB were hauled in front of the Treasury select committee after their IT fiasco a few years back, although I'm not sure what the threshold is for going over the FCA's head....

MeteredOut

eskbanker said:

MeteredOut said:

MellowJello said:

Government need to step in, not just.lolotely ask to reconsider. Doubt they will pile on any pressure. Santander should not be allowed to renege on the deal, especially not in the current financial climate where many are struggling financially. From 'free for ever' to £9.99 a month is a huge hike and I don't know any other 'organisation' that would be permitted to do such a thing.

What do you want the government to do?

Parliamentary intervention is undoubtedly a potential outcome if the matter gains enough traction, in the same way that TSB were hauled in front of the Treasury select committee after their IT fiasco a few years back, although I'm not sure what the threshold is for going over the FCA's head....

The TSB issue pretty much impacted (or had the potential to impact) every customer. What % of Santander customers hold the free forever account?

I can see it getting mentioned in parliament, but I can't see the government intervening.

Section62

MeteredOut said:

eskbanker said:

MeteredOut said:

MellowJello said:

Government need to step in, not just.lolotely ask to reconsider. Doubt they will pile on any pressure. Santander should not be allowed to renege on the deal, especially not in the current financial climate where many are struggling financially. From 'free for ever' to £9.99 a month is a huge hike and I don't know any other 'organisation' that would be permitted to do such a thing.

What do you want the government to do?

Parliamentary intervention is undoubtedly a potential outcome if the matter gains enough traction, in the same way that TSB were hauled in front of the Treasury select committee after their IT fiasco a few years back, although I'm not sure what the threshold is for going over the FCA's head....

The TSB issue pretty much impacted (or had the potential to impact) every customer. What % of Santander customers hold the free forever account?

I can see it getting mentioned in parliament, but I can't see the government intervening.

Intervention happens at different levels, not all public.  Sometimes a nod and wink, or a civil servant letting it be known that the politicians are uncomfortable with something.

I don't see the government stepping in with a change in the law or regulatory regime, but I said way way back in this thread that the optics of what Santander is doing will likely be a factor in the outcome.

Issues don't need to affect a large percentage of the population or group to come to the attention of the government or parliament.  It often matters more if there is someone looking for a bandwagon, or the issue aligns with something else more important, or the issue could be a useful distraction from something else.

eskbanker

Section62 said:
I don't see the government stepping in with a change in the law or regulatory regime...

Surely no such change is needed, it's more about Santander's non-compliance with existing measures, such as the FCA's requirements for fairness, transparency, etc?

solidpro

clairec666 said:

Santander know this, and are taking advantage of the fact that a proportion of their business customers will just cough up the £9.99 per month; a fair chunk will leave in protest, but they won't care, as they've shed all those free accounts that they wanted to be rid of.

It would be naive to think that by Santander losing 1 single 'free forever' business account is equal to losing a 'zero revenue' customer. As previously stated, if this happens, I will move several accounts and cards, including existing fee-paying ones along with it. I'm not going to get a 2 year free business  banking promise from another bank and leave my other fee-paying business bank account with Santander, am I? They have also benefited hugely from many customers holding 4/5/6 maybe 7 figure balances for nearly 20 years and paying no interest to the customer - all interest revenue stops overnight.

These along with reputation and future recommendations are all gone.

Section62

eskbanker said:

Section62 said:
I don't see the government stepping in with a change in the law or regulatory regime...

Surely no such change is needed, it's more about Santander's non-compliance with existing measures, such as the FCA's requirements for fairness, transparency, etc?

Agreed, hence I don't see the need for government-led changes.  From the start of the thread my view has been that Santander shouldn't be doing this, and FOS ought to uphold complaints against them.

However, there are some scenarios where the outcome could be different - for example there have been suggestions (from forum members) which would amount to debanking.  If something like that were to happen, and the recent regulatory changes around debanking weren't sufficient to stop it, then there could be a scenario where the government stepped in with a further change (albeit probably not retrospective).  There's also a possibility the 2015 changes are relied on as a loophole... if so, then the current consultation over changes to FOS time limits might become 'interesting'.

So although I don't think it should be necessary, I wouldn't entirely rule out the possibility of some kind of government action - depending how things play out.

solidpro

FSO responded to me and want me to prepare more details for their investigator when the time comes. I feel what reasons are important to the FSO are likely to be more specific than the general 'news' of why this is wrong. Any leads on what the FSO would be most interesting would be very useful - how we can give the clearest, concise reasons. So far, with the FSO in mind, I've written down:

1) The headline of my contract for business banking with Santander was 'free forever'. They said "not 6 months, not 2 years, but 
forever" and explained the only thing that would force them to end the contract was a massive change in the law or they stopped 
providing business banking. Neither of which has happened.

2) I picked Santander for business banking due to this specific pledge of Free Forever business banking. If they are now reneging 
on this headline of the contract, they put themselves at an unfair advantage over other banks I was looking to use instead.

3) In response to my complaint, they give two main reasons. They say that the landscape of business banking has changed when it has 
not. There are at least 5 major UK banks offering free business banking right now. They also say that their unilateral changes of 
the terms of our contract back in 2015 removes the free forever pledge. This high level part of the contract cannot be changed 
unulaterally and all correspondence with them at the time about not agreeing to this change was ignored.

4) I entered the contract with Santander of 'free business banking forever' regardless of what they called my type of business bank 
account. I have two different business bank accounts as part of this contract and they're the exact same accounts as when I signed 
up in 2008. They cannot say I now have a different product to what I signed up to in 2008.

5) When agreeing the contract in 2008 I accepted financial loss with this contract in that unlike other business bank services, I 
would not recieve any interest on my balances. Also I was not allowed to use cashiers and a number of other limitations due to the 
'free forever' aspect. If they are to remove this aspect, all the other aspects of the service don't make any sense. I would rather 
pay for business banking with another bank and recieve interest, use a cashier in a branch, etc.

6) If at some point £120 fees per annum becomes significant to my business survival, forcing this change in terms could effectively 
be de-banking my business

ForumUser7

solidpro said:

FSO responded to me and want me to prepare more details for their investigator when the time comes. I feel what reasons are important to the FSO are likely to be more specific than the general 'news' of why this is wrong. Any leads on what the FSO would be most interesting would be very useful - how we can give the clearest, concise reasons. So far, with the FSO in mind, I've written down:

1) The headline of my contract for business banking with Santander was 'free forever'. They said "not 6 months, not 2 years, but 
forever" and explained the only thing that would force them to end the contract was a massive change in the law or they stopped 
providing business banking. Neither of which has happened.

2) I picked Santander for business banking due to this specific pledge of Free Forever business banking. If they are now reneging 
on this headline of the contract, they put themselves at an unfair advantage over other banks I was looking to use instead.

3) In response to my complaint, they give two main reasons. They say that the landscape of business banking has changed when it has 
not. There are at least 5 major UK banks offering free business banking right now. They also say that their unilateral changes of 
the terms of our contract back in 2015 removes the free forever pledge. This high level part of the contract cannot be changed 
unulaterally and all correspondence with them at the time about not agreeing to this change was ignored.

4) I entered the contract with Santander of 'free business banking forever' regardless of what they called my type of business bank 
account. I have two different business bank accounts as part of this contract and they're the exact same accounts as when I signed 
up in 2008. They cannot say I now have a different product to what I signed up to in 2008.

5) When agreeing the contract in 2008 I accepted financial loss with this contract in that unlike other business bank services, I 
would not recieve any interest on my balances. Also I was not allowed to use cashiers and a number of other limitations due to the 
'free forever' aspect. If they are to remove this aspect, all the other aspects of the service don't make any sense. I would rather 
pay for business banking with another bank and recieve interest, use a cashier in a branch, etc.

6) If at some point £120 fees per annum becomes significant to my business survival, forcing this change in terms could effectively 
be de-banking my business

6 - Would reword to be less hypothetical. I've seen the FOS say they cannot deliberate on hypotheticals before