Santander free forever bank account changes

Emmia

I think that aside from those ranting on this forum and Facebook, the general public doesn't care about the removal of free banking for these accounts. In my view if businesses don't like it, they are free to close their accounts and move elsewhere.

The impact on Santander's image / public perception of taking this step is frankly going to be minimal.

I don't have a Santander account (never have), but this wouldn't put me off opening one if I wanted to, and I expect this is true of most people.

Section62

noitsnotme said:

Try and explain it away however you like, at the end of the day it’s still an insignificant blip in their accounting whether they planned for it or not.

I get it, you’re all angry about it, but it’s disingenuous to think that anyone will be ‘hurting’ the bank in any significant way by raising a few complaints and closing a few accounts.

This sub-discussion seems to focus heavily on Santander's turnover and profit (or loss) related to these accounts.  There's assumptions and simplifications on both sides, but if there is to be any 'hurting' of Santander it is rather more likely to be around what the "few complaints" might lead to.

Reputation is more important long-term than annual turnover/profit.  If Santander have fouled up here, and if the media choose to make it a story, then the 'hurt' to Santander UK could be quite significant.

No, we aren't talking about an existential threat, but for large companies operating in a regulated market there is always a bigger picture to think about.

As a shareholder, that is what I'm more concerned about.

noitsnotme

Section62 said:

noitsnotme said:

Try and explain it away however you like, at the end of the day it’s still an insignificant blip in their accounting whether they planned for it or not.

I get it, you’re all angry about it, but it’s disingenuous to think that anyone will be ‘hurting’ the bank in any significant way by raising a few complaints and closing a few accounts.

Reputation is more important long-term than annual turnover/profit.  If Santander have fouled up here, and if the media choose to make it a story, then the 'hurt' to Santander UK could be quite significant.

Yes a lot of assumptions as you say, I quite agree.  My further assumption, as I posted on here some pages back, is that the wider impact on reputation will be minimal.  The general public usually have little sympathy for something that doesn’t affect them and in this case I suggest they couldn’t care less about a bunch of businesses being charged an extra £10 a month.

Santander were fined £108million in December 2022 for lack of anti money laundering controls.  That is something more likely to concern a larger number of potential/existing customers.  I just had a quick look and it doesn’t seem to have had any significant impact on the share price at the time so as a shareholder I don’t think you have much to worry about.

For clarity, I’m not a shareholder but do have several personal accounts with Santander.

*edit* I’ve just realised the fine was for “serious, persistent gaps in its anti-money laundering (AML) controls affecting its business banking customers”!  And it appeared to have no impact on the banks share price.  I’m not sure the current scandal will be any different.

Section62

noitsnotme said:

Section62 said:

noitsnotme said:

Try and explain it away however you like, at the end of the day it’s still an insignificant blip in their accounting whether they planned for it or not.

I get it, you’re all angry about it, but it’s disingenuous to think that anyone will be ‘hurting’ the bank in any significant way by raising a few complaints and closing a few accounts.

Reputation is more important long-term than annual turnover/profit.  If Santander have fouled up here, and if the media choose to make it a story, then the 'hurt' to Santander UK could be quite significant.

Yes a lot of assumptions as you say, I quite agree.  My further assumption, as I posted on here some pages back, is that the wider impact on reputation will be minimal.  The general public usually have little sympathy for something that doesn’t affect them and in this case I suggest they couldn’t care less about a bunch of businesses being charged an extra £10 a month.

Santander were fined £108million in December 2022 for lack of anti money laundering controls.  That is something more likely to concern a larger number of potential/existing customers.  I just had a quick look and it doesn’t seem to have had any significant impact on the share price at the time so as a shareholder I don’t think you have much to worry about.

For clarity, I’m not a shareholder but do have several personal accounts with Santander.

*edit* I’ve just realised the fine was for “serious, persistent gaps in its anti-money laundering (AML) controls affecting its business banking customers”!  And it appeared to have no impact on the banks share price.  I’m not sure the current scandal will be any different.

Again, if thinking is limited to "at the time", then the point is being missed.

Barclays is non grata among certain groups for what it was doing in South Africa some 40 years ago.  You can look at Barclays figures today and say they are doing very nicely regardless, but what none of us can say is how much better Barclays might be doing if the boycott had never happened.

For many of us in business, conducting yourself with honesty and integrity is more important than profit and scraping an extra pound or two.  Santander repeating their breaking of their 'free forever' promise is not upholding those standards.  They are also standards the FCA requires.

Even if FOS say there is nothing wrong in what Santander are doing, it won't be the end of the story.

Emmia

Section62 said:

noitsnotme said:

Section62 said:

noitsnotme said:

Try and explain it away however you like, at the end of the day it’s still an insignificant blip in their accounting whether they planned for it or not.

I get it, you’re all angry about it, but it’s disingenuous to think that anyone will be ‘hurting’ the bank in any significant way by raising a few complaints and closing a few accounts.

Reputation is more important long-term than annual turnover/profit.  If Santander have fouled up here, and if the media choose to make it a story, then the 'hurt' to Santander UK could be quite significant.

Yes a lot of assumptions as you say, I quite agree.  My further assumption, as I posted on here some pages back, is that the wider impact on reputation will be minimal.  The general public usually have little sympathy for something that doesn’t affect them and in this case I suggest they couldn’t care less about a bunch of businesses being charged an extra £10 a month.

Santander were fined £108million in December 2022 for lack of anti money laundering controls.  That is something more likely to concern a larger number of potential/existing customers.  I just had a quick look and it doesn’t seem to have had any significant impact on the share price at the time so as a shareholder I don’t think you have much to worry about.

For clarity, I’m not a shareholder but do have several personal accounts with Santander.

*edit* I’ve just realised the fine was for “serious, persistent gaps in its anti-money laundering (AML) controls affecting its business banking customers”!  And it appeared to have no impact on the banks share price.  I’m not sure the current scandal will be any different.

Again, if thinking is limited to "at the time", then the point is being missed.

Barclays is non grata among certain groups for what it was doing in South Africa some 40 years ago.  You can look at Barclays figures today and say they are doing very nicely regardless, but what none of us can say is how much better Barclays might be doing if the boycott had never happened.

For many of us in business, conducting yourself with honesty and integrity is more important than profit and scraping an extra pound or two.  Santander repeating their breaking of their 'free forever' promise is not upholding those standards.  They are also standards the FCA requires.

Even if FOS say there is nothing wrong in what Santander are doing, it won't be the end of the story.

Perhaps for your health and wellbeing it should be.

clairec666

Emmia said:

I think that aside from those ranting on this forum and Facebook, the general public doesn't care about the removal of free banking for these accounts. In my view if businesses don't like it, they are free to close their accounts and move elsewhere.

The impact on Santander's image / public perception of taking this step is frankly going to be minimal.

I don't have a Santander account (never have), but this wouldn't put me off opening one if I wanted to, and I expect this is true of most people.

I somewhat agree. I've been left with a bit of a negative opinion of Santander after all this, but probably not enough for me to boycott them. If they suddenly started offering a really good ISA rate I'd probably snap it up.

MeteredOut

amyfairweather said:

MeteredOut said:

amyfairweather said:

flickadee001 said:

Just catching up with the thread here, as I’ve been away for a while and haven’t had the chance to follow a lot of the newer discussions (apologies for being so out of the loop!).

For my own clarity, and maybe for others in a similar position, is there any update on what’s happening moving forward with the upcoming charges?

I’ve just spoken directly to a Senior Complaints Manager regarding a separate incident, but I did ask a few times about the impending charges. From what I was told, it looks like they will be going ahead. I was also informed that if anything were to change, there would be an outreach to customers to gauge opinion. I did stress that the backlash among existing customers is growing, with many people very frustrated, especially those of us who’ve been with the bank for 20+ years and were promised “free banking forever.”

Given how this is looking, I’m now seriously considering abandoning ship before the October 1st deadline.

Would be interested to hear if anyone else has had any different information or is thinking along the same lines.

It's a gamble either way; you need to decide what works best for you and the size of your business.

If you close the account and subsequently Santander "lose", then you will also lose as it'll be too late at that point - you'll have already closed the account.

If Santander win, then by the time FOS come to a decision, it should only be a few £9.99's, at most.

I'm willing to take that risk, others won't.

If the result goes against us, I'll close the account, so Santander is on a hiding to nothing as they've already lost me as a personal customer.  Apparently, somehow all this means I'm "unprofitable" to them, but paying them £9.99 would make me profitable.

The only reason I'm carrying on the fight is the promise of free forever.  You could move to Starling or whoever and they're free today, but will they be free tomorrow?  That's why these accounts are worth keeping open if you can.

But yes, if the fight is lost, then I too will be moving my unprofitable business account elsewhere - in the knowledge that this whole process will have cost Santander a small fortune.

Can you provide any workings behind that "knowledge"? I suspect Santander have their own version of knowledge.

Certainly, Santander were under the impression that they would generate an extra £119.88 from me over the next 12 months.  That's before the other charges kick in for cash/cheque deposits.

Whereas, in reality, the following will apply:
1. They will not be receiving that £119.88 (or perhaps some of it whilst the FOS inquiry concludes, but lets assume they are not receiving a penny of it).
Running total -£119.88
2. They are probably going to have to pay £650 to FOS.
Running total -£769.88
3. I am in the process of filing a second complaint due to handling of the first.  Cost unknown.
Running total -£769.88
4. I have opened a subject access request under GDPR.  Cost unknown.
Running total -£769.88
5. They are going to lose whatever margin they were making on my business current account & savings if/when I leave.  I don't know the exact figure, but lets conservatively estimate their margin is somewhere between £2000-£3000.
Running total -£3269.88 (went for £2500)
6. I've closed a personal account which had the £85k FSCS maximum in it.  Santander margin of £2000?
Running total -£5269.88
7. I've advised friends/family to do likewise.  Santander margin unknown.
Running total still -£5269.88
8. Santander admin / complaints / wasted time dealing with FOS.  Conservative estimate £500.
Total -£5769.88

So even with conservative estimates, which no doubt you will disagree with, that's 47 years worth of £9.99's or 47 other business customers to stay quiet and accept it in order for them to get back to where they expected to be.  But then what about all those £9.99's?  You'd need yet more customers to pick up their slack.

Multiply all of that across the "unprofitable" free business banking clientele and, like I said, it comes back to a small fortune.  Of course, to Santander, it's nothing.

I think your premise that Santandar will have assumed £120 income from each customer is flawed, but only they will know for sure. I can't really disagree with any of your figures (and they could easily be +/- 100% either way), although I doubt they're making £2-3K from each account. But, even if thousands of customers cost those sums, the cumulative amount is noise in relation to their revenue, not a small fortune. 

Section62

Emmia said:

Section62 said:

noitsnotme said:

Section62 said:

noitsnotme said:

Try and explain it away however you like, at the end of the day it’s still an insignificant blip in their accounting whether they planned for it or not.

I get it, you’re all angry about it, but it’s disingenuous to think that anyone will be ‘hurting’ the bank in any significant way by raising a few complaints and closing a few accounts.

Reputation is more important long-term than annual turnover/profit.  If Santander have fouled up here, and if the media choose to make it a story, then the 'hurt' to Santander UK could be quite significant.

Yes a lot of assumptions as you say, I quite agree.  My further assumption, as I posted on here some pages back, is that the wider impact on reputation will be minimal.  The general public usually have little sympathy for something that doesn’t affect them and in this case I suggest they couldn’t care less about a bunch of businesses being charged an extra £10 a month.

Santander were fined £108million in December 2022 for lack of anti money laundering controls.  That is something more likely to concern a larger number of potential/existing customers.  I just had a quick look and it doesn’t seem to have had any significant impact on the share price at the time so as a shareholder I don’t think you have much to worry about.

For clarity, I’m not a shareholder but do have several personal accounts with Santander.

*edit* I’ve just realised the fine was for “serious, persistent gaps in its anti-money laundering (AML) controls affecting its business banking customers”!  And it appeared to have no impact on the banks share price.  I’m not sure the current scandal will be any different.

Again, if thinking is limited to "at the time", then the point is being missed.

Barclays is non grata among certain groups for what it was doing in South Africa some 40 years ago.  You can look at Barclays figures today and say they are doing very nicely regardless, but what none of us can say is how much better Barclays might be doing if the boycott had never happened.

For many of us in business, conducting yourself with honesty and integrity is more important than profit and scraping an extra pound or two.  Santander repeating their breaking of their 'free forever' promise is not upholding those standards.  They are also standards the FCA requires.

Even if FOS say there is nothing wrong in what Santander are doing, it won't be the end of the story.

Perhaps for your health and wellbeing it should be.

Thanks for the concern.

But I don't mean I'll be doing anything personally - I meant in some way Santander's shafting of this group of customers will come back on them.  Karma, and all that.

noitsnotme

Section62 said:

noitsnotme said:

Section62 said:

noitsnotme said:

Try and explain it away however you like, at the end of the day it’s still an insignificant blip in their accounting whether they planned for it or not.

I get it, you’re all angry about it, but it’s disingenuous to think that anyone will be ‘hurting’ the bank in any significant way by raising a few complaints and closing a few accounts.

Reputation is more important long-term than annual turnover/profit.  If Santander have fouled up here, and if the media choose to make it a story, then the 'hurt' to Santander UK could be quite significant.

Yes a lot of assumptions as you say, I quite agree.  My further assumption, as I posted on here some pages back, is that the wider impact on reputation will be minimal.  The general public usually have little sympathy for something that doesn’t affect them and in this case I suggest they couldn’t care less about a bunch of businesses being charged an extra £10 a month.

Santander were fined £108million in December 2022 for lack of anti money laundering controls.  That is something more likely to concern a larger number of potential/existing customers.  I just had a quick look and it doesn’t seem to have had any significant impact on the share price at the time so as a shareholder I don’t think you have much to worry about.

For clarity, I’m not a shareholder but do have several personal accounts with Santander.

*edit* I’ve just realised the fine was for “serious, persistent gaps in its anti-money laundering (AML) controls affecting its business banking customers”!  And it appeared to have no impact on the banks share price.  I’m not sure the current scandal will be any different.

Again, if thinking is limited to "at the time", then the point is being missed.

Barclays is non grata among certain groups for what it was doing in South Africa some 40 years ago.  You can look at Barclays figures today and say they are doing very nicely regardless, but what none of us can say is how much better Barclays might be doing if the boycott had never happened.

For many of us in business, conducting yourself with honesty and integrity is more important than profit and scraping an extra pound or two.  Santander repeating their breaking of their 'free forever' promise is not upholding those standards.  They are also standards the FCA requires.

Even if FOS say there is nothing wrong in what Santander are doing, it won't be the end of the story.

All good points but I don’t think this current free banking scandal comes close to Barclays supporting apartheid.  This will be forgotten by the masses before you know it.  All in my humble opinion of course.  I appreciate others believe otherwise.

MeteredOut

For those that don't believe Santander made this change for anything other than financial reasons, why do they think the decision was made?

(I'm not sure if that question makes me a narcissistic Santander defender or stan. Is there a definition somewhere so I can check?)