Clydesdale Bank Plc trading as Virgin Money · DRN-6220361

The complaint Mr P is unhappy with Clydesdale Bank Plc trading as Virgin Money. He contacted Virgin Money to get up to date balances on his ISA and E-Saver accounts. He asked for support in transferring these to newer accounts that offered better interest rates. Virgin Money provided details of the current accounts and the interest rates that applied. But it didn’t offer any assistance regarding moving the accounts. Mr P said he lost out on better interest rates because of this. What happened As Virgin Money didn’t take any further action Mr P’s ISA remained at an interest rate of 0.41%. Mr P said he expected the interest rate to increase in line with Bank of England base rate. Mr P said it was difficult for him to keep on top of such issues due to his medical conditions and that was why he asked Virgin Money for help. In the end Mr P closed the ISA and transferred his money elsewhere in 2023. He complained and Virgin Money paid him £100 in compensation for the issues. Mr P said the compensation offer was worth less than 0.15% of his account balance. He said other banks had been able to assist him in changing accounts through secure emails. He felt Virgin Money was using his medical conditions against him. Mr P said he was too unwell to take any further action when Virgin Money didn’t help him after he requested its support. He said he wanted to be put back in the position he would have been if Virgin Money had helped him when he asked it to in October 2022. Virgin Money apologised. It understood why Mr P was unhappy with the service, accepted it hadn’t been good enough and partially upheld his complaint. In relation to Mr P’s medical conditions, it said unfortunately it does only offer online accounts. Virgin Money confirmed it didn’t have accounts that track base rates. But it did have accounts available with higher interest rates all available to view on the website. It confirmed if Mr P was unable to do it if he had anyone who could help him they could transfer the accounts for him. If that wasn’t possible it said it would be happy to assist him by telephone. It said it didn’t have a specific team that could help people with medical conditions. It paid the £100 compensation for this into Mr P’s account. It concluded its Contact Centre would be able to discuss Mr P’s medical conditions and offer support and advice if he makes contact. Mr P remained unhappy and brought his complaint to this service. Our investigator reviewed the complaint and requested further evidence from Virgin Money. At this point Virgin Money reconsidered the complaint and made a further offer. It noted Mr P wanted limited access accounts. It concluded the only other limited access account available back in October 2022 was the Defined access E-Saver paying 1.30% interest. Virgin Money accepted it should have clarified with Mr P at the earliest point what limited access accounts it had available and it should have explained what action he needed to take

-- 1 of 4 --

then too. It confirmed again here it would then offer to help open the new account in branch or telephone if the customer was unable to do it for themselves online. In conclusion it said it would have been able to act on his written instructions confirming which account he wanted to take out. To resolve the matter Virgin Money offered to adjust the interest rate as if Mr P had “invested into the defined access account paying 1.30% in October 2022. This account with limited access had the highest interest rate available in October 2022.” Virgin Money continued “We will assess the amount based on the balances in each of his accounts and the differential interest rate between what Mr P earned in each account (being 0.35% in the E-Saver and 0.41% in the Double Take), from 19 October 2022 until each of these accounts were closed.” Mr P understandably wanted a little more clarity around what this would mean for him in terms of settlement. Our investigator asked Virgin Money to calculate the amounts involved. Virgin responded and laid out the exact figures it was willing to pay: “Based on 1.30% the differential rate for the Double Take would be 0.89% - Balance at its highest pre-closure was £76,826.95 x 279 days x 0.89% / 365 = £522.65. The differential rate for the E-Saver would be 0.95% - Balance as at its highest pre-closure = £5,262.52 x 537 days x 0.95%/ 365 = £73.55.” Our investigator confirmed to Mr P the additional interest for the E-Saver account was based on the higher balance Mr P had in the account prior to a withdrawal he made in March 2023 almost a month prior to the account closing. Virgin Money offered to pay this extra as a gesture of goodwill even though Mr P could have closed the account nine months earlier at the point when he had closed the ISA. Our investigator said these issues had all occurred prior to Consumer Duty starting. And she felt as Mr P had asked for an account with similar access terms to the accounts he already held that this offer from Virgin Money was reasonable. Mr P asked for his complaint to be passed to an ombudsman for a final decision. He mentioned emails not being responded to and Virgin Money signing him up to a “stagnant account”. Mr P also mentioned the Financial Conduct Authority. But this service can only deal with his individual complaint. If he wishes to raise wider issues about Virgin Money with the FCA he would need to do that directly. 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. There’s been a lot of correspondence around the complaint for which I’m grateful. But this is an informal service so I’m not going to comment on everything included within this complaint. Instead, I’m going to stick to what I think are the central points that apply here. I can confirm all of the evidence provided by both sides has been considered. This investigation has considered the introduction of Consumer Duty which became part of regulation on 31 July 2023. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) brought this in to raise

-- 2 of 4 --

standards for consumer protection. Unfortunately for this complaint all of the key issues occurred prior to Consumer Duty being introduced. From the outset of his complaint Mr P was clear that he would like to be, “put in the position I would be in had Virgin helped me in October.” I note that from the start of the complaint there was an acceptance from Virgin Money that its service had fallen short of what Mr P should have been able to expect. I think it was important for it to accept and acknowledge that. Virgin Money could and should have responded to both points of Mr P’s enquiry at that stage when it wrote to him 1 November 2022. I know there’s some dispute between the parties about emails that were sent and not responded to and whether or not Virgin Money received these, but I think that gets away from the central point which Virgin Money does accept. And that is from Mr P’s request in October 2022 it knew that he wanted it to take action. I do think the initial offer of £100 compensation wasn’t enough. This didn’t take into account Mr P’s valid point about what he could have been paid in interest if his accounts had been transferred in October 2022. It only referred to Virgin Money accepting mistakes had been made. At the point when Mr P complained Virgin Money did also refer to the ways it could offer him more support in view of his medical conditions – which I’ve referred to in more detail earlier in this decision. It accepted it should have picked this up when he first mentioned it but pointed out that customers control their accounts online. Virgin Money confirmed when a customer does log in to view their account the current interest rate that applies would be seen on the screen with the account details. It also said if there was any issue with sending details by email to a customer its system would make sure any required updates would be sent by letter too. For the Double Take E-ISA Virgin Money confirmed this opened in 2018. It confirmed there were rate changes over the course of the product lowering the interest rate from the 1.45% that applied when the account was started. With the E-Saver account this was opened in 2017 and there were a couple of rate reductions for this account too. Regarding the ISA Virgin Money said, “In line with the terms of the account which is classified as a ‘non-payment account’, the customer would have been provided with 14 days’ notice of a decrease to rate, so should have received 3 x rate reduction comms before he closed the account.” In terms of other accounts available at the time when Mr P contacted Virgin Money it said there were other Everyday Saver accounts and Easy Access Cash E-ISA accounts available but both had a lower interest rate of 0.25%. It accepted it didn’t mention initially any limited access accounts. Virgin Money did then note that the limited access account available at the time of Mr P’s initial enquiry. It said this was the Defined access E-Saver, and it was paying interest at 1.30%. This was the highest interest rate it had at that time in October 2022. It then offered to pay interest on both accounts from 19 October 2022 until each of the accounts closed. The amounts of interest this returned is noted earlier in this decision.

-- 3 of 4 --

Based on how he felt he had been treated and the time this has taken I completely understand Mr P’s wish to continue to review this complaint. He was undecided whether or not to accept the offer from Virgin Money. But I think his initial point is the key one - he wanted Virgin Money to put him back in the position he should have been when he first asked it for help. Looking at the offer regarding paying the interest rate that applied to the higher interest account and the £100 compensation (already paid) I think Virgin Money has acted as if the Consumer Duty applied. In the circumstances of this complaint, Virgin Money’s offer is a fair and reasonable outcome. Putting things right • Pay £522.65 for the difference in interest from the Double Take E-ISA. • Pay £73.55 for the difference in interest from the E-Saver. My final decision I uphold this complaint. I require Clydesdale Bank Plc trading as Virgin Money to go ahead with its offer and: • Pay £522.65 for the difference in interest from the Double Take E-ISA. • Pay £73.55 for the difference in interest from the E-Saver. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr P to accept or reject my decision before 17 April 2026. John Quinlan Ombudsman

-- 4 of 4 --