Santander UK Plc · DRN-5957627

The complaint Mr M complains that Santander UK Plc closed his accounts and blocked his access during the notice period. Mr M would like to have his accounts reinstated. What happened The details of this complaint are well known to both parties, so I won’t repeat them again here. Instead, I’ll focus on giving my reason for my decision. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. Having done so I’ve decided to partially uphold this complaint. I’ll explain why below. • Santander has extensive legal and regulatory obligations which UK legislation places on it as a regulated financial business. Including the responsibility to protect its customers from financial harm and to prevent and detect financial crime. • To comply with these obligations Santander reviewed and closed Mr M’s accounts. Santander also restricted Mr M’s access to the accounts during the notice period. • As the investigator has said banks are entitled to end their business relationship with a customer, as long as it’s done fairly and is in line with the terms and conditions of the account. Banks should, however, give reasonable notice before closing an account. Usually that means 60 days’ notice, but it can be less depending on the circumstances. In this case Santander gave Mr M 60 days’ notice to make alternative banking arrangements. But restricted access to the accounts during the period. Because he wasn’t able to use his accounts, I consider this to be an immediate closure. • I’ve considered whether Santander acted fairly in closing Mr M’s accounts as it did. I’ve looked at the terms and conditions of his accounts. For Santander to act fairly here they needed to meet the criteria for immediate closure and looking at the evidence and the terms, I’m not satisfied Santander applied the terms fairly when they closed Mr M’s accounts. I say this because Mr M’s use of his accounts was normal activity in line with the terms and conditions. So, I consider that Santander should have given Mr M 60 days’ notice with access to his accounts so that he could have made alternative banking arrangements. • I appreciate that Mr M would still have had to go to the trouble of changing banks and the upheaval that constitutes, however he wouldn’t have needed to do it in such a hurry. Because of this and the added stress this caused him I think Santander should compensate Mr M with £150.

-- 1 of 3 --

• Mr M has said that he was a victim of cheque fraud on an account opened in his name in September 2021. Santander has since accepted this is the case. • Mr M would like his accounts reinstated. His view is that he has been a good customer of the bank and he has been a victim of impersonation fraud unbeknown to him. He doesn’t think he should be penalized for this by having his accounts closed. • I am sympathetic with Mr M’s position here. Mr M wants to know why his accounts can’t be reinstated. Santander isn’t obliged to provide a reason for him. I can’t say they’ve done anything wrong by not giving him more detail. But the reason for not wanting Mr M as a customer should be rational, factually correct, and non- discriminatory. The rules of our service allow us to receive evidence in confidence. We may treat evidence from financial businesses as confidential for a number of reasons – for example if it contains information about other customers, security information, or commercially sensitive information. Some of the information Santander has shared with us is information I consider should be kept confidential, so I won’t be sharing it with Mr M. The information provided is such that I am able to conclude that Santander acted reasonably when they refused to reinstate Mr M’s accounts. It follows I won’t be asking them to reinstate them. • Mr M has mentioned that as a direct result of the immediate closure he has incurred a financial loss in that two of his insurance policies for income protection and accidental death have now defaulted and are lost. I have asked Mr M for evidence of these policies defaulting. Mr M has provided this service with letters from the insurance company dated 15 October 2025 showing the policies have been cancelled. Mr M has said he wasn’t able to contact the insurer because Santander didn’t provide him with a list of his direct debits despite his request. Mr M has told us he didn’t receive the letter dated 15 October 2025 nor the previous letter it refers to informing him that the insurance company hadn’t been able to collect the premium. Mr M has said that his address had changed. The letters went to his old address, so he didn’t receive the letters. I understand that it would have been easier to receive a list from Santander. Having said that had Mr M updated his address with his insurance company at the time of his move, he would have been alerted in time and could have paid his premiums. Because of this I can’t hold Santander liable for the financial loss Mr M has incurred. • Mr M has said that there was a delay in paying him the funds in his accounts following the closure. I can see from the information that Mr M’s account closed on 23 June 2025. And he accessed some of his funds in April and in May 2025. Some funds remained in the account and following closure they were held by Santander. I can see there was some confusion on both sides regarding the remaining funds, and I accept that this could have gone smoother. Mr M gave Santander details of his new account, and his remaining funds were transferred on 19 November 2025. These funds were transferred promptly once he provided Santander with his account details. In summary I appreciate having his account closed was a shock to Mr M. I think Santander should have given him 60 days’ notice so it’s only fair they pay him compensation. I think £150 is a fair and reasonable amount for the reasons I have outlined above. My final decision My final decision is I partially uphold this complaint. I direct Santander UK Plc to pay Mr M £150 for his distress.

-- 2 of 3 --

Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr M to accept or reject my decision before 14 April 2026. Esperanza Fuentes Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --