Cynergy Bank Plc · DRN-6175110

The complaint Mr M complains about incorrect information Cynergy Bank Plc provided him with when he enquired about interest payment frequency on his individual Savings Account (ISA). What happened Mr M asked Cynergy about the frequency of interest payments on one of his ISAs, explaining this ISA showed the next interest payment would occur in April 2027. Mr M explained, after enquiring with Cynergy, it told him in a message on 6 August 2025 the next interest payment would be in April 2027. Mr M said the next date for an interest payment should be in April 2026, which is the one- year anniversary of this ISA. This is because the terms and conditions of the ISA state interest will be paid annually. Mr M explained he raised a complaint with Cynergy about this specific matter on 6 August but didn’t receive a response. Mr M said he received an email from Cynergy in mid-September 2025 informing him it had rectified the interest frequency on this fixed rate ISA, but this email didn’t offer an apology or explain why he had been given incorrect information in August. Mr M wrote to Cynergy again towards the end of September 2025, stating he hadn’t received a response to the complaint he had raised on 6 August. Cynergy responded his complaint was still under investigation, to which Mr M explained Cynergy needed to respond by 1 October to meet the eight-week deadline for complaint responses. Cynergy issued a final response letter to Mr M, dated 11 November 2025. Cynergy admitted the interest frequency on Mr M’s ISA was incorrectly set, this issue was investigated on 12 September, and Cynergy said it had written to Mr M on 17 September advising the interest frequency had now been corrected. Cynergy offered its sincere apologies for any inconvenience caused. Cynergy confirmed to our service Mr M opened his two-year fixed rate ISA on 22 April 2024, and interest would be capitalised annually. Cynergy explained £890 would credit Mr M’s ISA in April 2026, in line with the ISAs terms and conditions. Cynergy said the reference to April 2027 in its secure message to Mr M dated 6 August, was related to the maturity of his ISA, rather than the annual interest credit. Cynergy also confirmed it had initially treated this issue as an extension of a previous complaint related to how the ISAs were originally set up, and only raised a second complaint in mid-September about this specific issue. Our investigator didn’t think Cynergy needed to take any further action. They thought Cynergy had apologised and provided an explanation in its final response in November 2025. Mr M maintained he didn’t receive a response or an apology to the complaint he raised with Cynergy on 6 August, so approached our service in October after the deadline passed for a response, but before Cynergy had issued its final response. He reiterated Cynergy had failed to meet deadlines regarding complaint handling. As Mr M rejected our investigator’s recommendation, his complaint has been passed to me to make a final decision.

-- 1 of 3 --

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 appreciate how strongly Mr M feels about his complaint. Although I may not mention every point raised, I have considered everything but limited my findings to the areas which impact the outcome of the case. No discourtesy is intended by this, it just reflects the informal nature of our service. Where evidence is incomplete, inconclusive or contradictory, I have to make decisions on the balance of probabilities – that is, what I consider is more likely than not to have happened in light of the available evidence and the wider surrounding circumstances. Firstly, some of the issues Mr M has raised in his complaint to our service are regarding complaint handling. Complaint handling is not in itself a regulated activity, and therefore our service isn’t able to consider such points in isolation. I can consider the issues Mr M has raised regarding the misinformation he said he received from Cynergy. I appreciate from his more recent submissions, Mr M isn’t satisfied he has received a response or an apology regarding the issues he has raised about the frequency of his interest payments on his two-year fixed rate ISA. However, as I have clarified above, I am reasonably satisfied Cynergy did cover this issue in its response dated 11 November 2025. This correspondence suggests Cynergy recognised in mid-September, after Mr M had raised the issues, that the frequency of interest payments for this ISA was incorrect and corrected this a few days later. Cynergy then emailed Mr M to confirm it had adjusted the frequency of the payment of interest on 17 September 2025. The email Mr M initially complained about, sent by Cynergy on 6 August 2025, said the following; ‘We would like to inform you that You hold a 2-year Fixed Rate ISA, and as per the product terms, the interest will be capitalised and paid at the maturity of your fixed term [sic].’ Cynergy provided our service with a copy of an email it sent to Mr M on the late afternoon of 6 August 2025. I accept this response concerned issues related to the setting up of two ISAs, whilst apologetic, it was regarding separate issues and not the issue Mr M had raised earlier that day. The next email on file from Cynergy was on 17 September, this short email states Cynergy had ‘rectified the interest frequency on the Fixed Rate ISA’ and Mr M would receive an updated investment certificate soon. I do think, on balance, Cynergy’s response here was relatively brief and vague and I haven’t seen any evidence it clearly explained to Mr M he would receive the interest paid on his ISA annually. But I am also mindful Cynergy were responding here to a specific issue, so it may have been reasonably apparent by rectifying the frequency, it had amended it in line with the issues Mr M had raised. However, on balance, I do think there has been some poor service by Cynergy, and it also could have responded more quickly to the further issues Mr M raised. Considering the overall issues at hand, and that some of those issues are complaint handling, I am satisfied the issue related to interest was put right relatively quickly after Mr M raised his concerns I am also mindful Mr M has a two-year fixed ISA, he wouldn’t have been able to withdraw the funds without a penalty before April 2027. There also wasn’t any suggestion he wouldn’t receive the interest agreed over this two-year period. He has also not indicated any intention to close the ISA early or make a withdrawal.

-- 2 of 3 --

These points lead me to think, on balance, the impact on Mr M here is limited to the vagueness of the communication Cynergy provided about this specific issue. I am satisfied there is certainly no financial loss to Mr M Our service accepts dealing with financial matters won’t always be ‘hassle free’, we also accept business can apologise for small administrative errors or short delays to resolve complaints, provided the business corrects the issues complaint about quickly and the issues cause minimal impact. I am satisfied Cynergy acted reasonably quickly to resolve the issue, has apologised for the impact, and this impact was limited to some minor distress and inconvenience, mostly caused by poor communication. I am therefore satisfied Cynergy has acted fairly and reasonably here, and I don’t think it needs to take any further action. I appreciate Mr M will likely be dissatisfied with my decision, but I trust I have explained the reasons for my decision and why I am satisfied, considering the wider circumstances, Cynergy has done enough to correct the situation. My final decision For the reasons I have given, my final decision is I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr M to accept or reject my decision before 21 April 2026. Gareth Jones Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --