Santander UK Plc · DRN-5981609

The complaint A company, which I’ll refer to as L, complains that Santander UK Plc unfairly gave notice in July 2025 that it planned to migrate L’s bank account, which was free from fees, to an account that incurs a monthly fee. What happened L opened its account in 2010. At the time, the account was marketed as free day-to-day banking forever. In 2025, L received notice from Santander that it was transferring the company onto a new account, which would have a different charging structure – most noticeably a monthly fee of £9.99. L complained to Santander. Unhappy with the bank’s response, it referred its complaint to us. L said Santander’s actions are unfair because the company was promised, when it opened its account, that it would have free banking forever. The company would like Santander to honour its promise as set out when the account was opened. Santander has told us:  Whilst it accepts that the account taken out by L was marketed as free banking forever, this has never been included in the terms and conditions of the account.  Over the years, Santander has needed to review the products it is able to offer its customers and, as part of simplifying the accounts available, it has migrated certain accounts to new products. In 2015, L’s account was migrated to an ‘everyday account’ which has no promise of fee-free banking. More recently, the bank needed to migrate some customers to a new account, and this is also an account with no promise of fee-free banking.  Banking services have changed in the years since L’s account was opened – some 15 years ago – and there have been changes in the relevant law and regulations. This has resulted in a need to change the way it operates business accounts which justifies a fee being charged.  To ensure it provides a fair and consistent service to all its customers, Santander is simplifying its business account range by consolidating existing business accounts to the ‘classic’ account which comes with a fee of £9.99 per month. Many of those customers migrating to the classic account have not benefitted from fee-free banking for the past 15 years, and most of the products it’s migrating have a monthly fee of more than £9.99 per month.

-- 1 of 3 --

 The implementation of a monthly fee is supported by the terms and conditions, and it has given L adequate notice of the intended change. L’s choices are to move to the new account with a monthly fee, close the account, or switch to a new provider. Our investigator looked into the matter but didn’t recommend that the complaint should be upheld. L didn’t accept the investigator’s findings, so the complaint has been passed to me for a 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. I’m sorry to disappoint L’s director, but I’ve reached the same conclusion as the investigator. There’s no dispute here that the marketing information for L’s account, when it was opened, set out that Santander was offering free banking forever. It’s clear this was how the account was advertised and I’ve seen the literature from the time that supports this. Santander isn’t disputing this either. So I accept what L’s director has said about what the company was told in some of the literature linked to the account when it was opened. The issue for me to decide here is whether I think Santander is acting unfairly in migrating L to the new account now, taking into account the terms and conditions applicable to L’s account. The terms and conditions applicable to the account when L opened it said: “5.1.1 We may change these Conditions (which includes adding or removing conditions) by notifying you of the change.” I’ve also reviewed all the subsequent versions of the applicable terms and conditions available throughout the years, from the time the account was opened until the most recent version. I can see they all contain the same, or similar, wording that allowed changes to be made. So, for 15 years, Santander has been clear in the applicable terms and conditions that changes can be made to the account, and none provided a guarantee of free banking forever. Despite this, L has benefitted from free business banking for 15 years. Overall, I think it’s fair and reasonable that Santander is relying on the terms and conditions and making these changes. The other relevant terms and conditions to consider are the most recent, as the bank is making these changes now. In 2015, Santander migrated L’s account to a Santander branded ‘Business Everyday Current Account’ and Santander’s general terms and conditions applied from that point. They set out that: “This agreement may last for a long time, so we’re likely to need to make changes to it from time to time. We might change these terms or your account’s specific conditions. This includes interest rates or fees (such as adding or removing fees)…” The terms and conditions also provide a list of reasons why Santander might make changes, which include taking into account changes in costs and regulation. The terms and conditions were updated in April 2025, and the above did not change.

-- 2 of 3 --

I’m therefore satisfied that the terms and conditions currently applicable to L’s account allow Santander to make changes to it, subject to giving sufficient notice of this to its customers. The terms and conditions set out that Santander should give 60 days’ notice of the change. I can see it has given L more than this, so I’m satisfied that it has provided the required notice. L feels strongly that literature outside of the terms and conditions formed part of Santander’s obligations to L. I’ve carefully considered this point and the literature. But the terms and conditions are what outline the contractual obligations between Santander and its customer. Even if the other literature did form part of the contractual agreement L had with Santander, the bank would still be able to change this agreement under the terms and conditions outlined above. Free business banking is not currently a typical offering from any major retail bank. And in Santander’s case it’s aware that whilst some customers, like L, have benefitted from fee-free banking for 15 years or longer, others have been paying significantly more. Santander has said it’s taking this step to ensure all its customers are being treated fairly, and I don’t find it’s acting unfairly by asking L to pay a fee in this case. As a commercial business, Santander is entitled to make decisions about products that are no longer commercially viable, including withdrawing them completely. In this case, the bank decided it will no longer offer the account L currently has. This is a decision it’s entitled to make, and one which this service wouldn’t interfere with. So, even if there had been a contractual obligation always to provide the account with no fees attached, I wouldn’t have concluded that Santander should be required to provide this product to L indefinitely if it believed it was uneconomical to do so. I also note that the terms and conditions allow Santander to close the account as long as sufficient notice is given. Santander has offered L a reasonable alternative account, albeit with a fee, and it has given L enough notice of the changes so it can find alternative options should it wish to. I understand L feels Santander has broken its promise. But overall, I’m satisfied it’s entitled to change the terms and conditions applicable to the account – including in relation to the cost of the account - as long as sufficient notice has been provided, as it has been in this case. For the above reasons, I don’t find that Santander is acting unfairly or unreasonably in migrating L to the new account. My final decision My final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask L to accept or reject my decision before 28 April 2026. Colin Brown Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --