DRN-6061314

The complaint Mr R complains it was unfair of Yorkshire Building Society (YBS) to close its local agency. What happened The background to this complaint is well-known to both parties, so I will only summarise it briefly. Mr R lives on an island off the mainland of the United Kingdom. At the time of making his complaint, YBS had an agency in his local area which he and his wife accessed physically. Mr R says he doesn’t use online banking after bad experiences, so being able to access counter services is important to him. In 2025 YBS decided to close the agency, and it closed in late January 2026, while his complaint was with our service. Mr R says the decision to close the agency means YBS has withdrawn services to an already underserved community with numerous vulnerable customers. He also says accessing a YBS branch on the mainland would be an inconvenient and costly exercise. Our investigator didn’t uphold the complaint. They said it was YBS’s discretion as to where it operates, and it wouldn’t be for our service to interfere with these kinds of decisions. Mr R appealed and asked for a final decision, so his complaint has been given to me to decide in my capacity as an ombudsman. 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 Mr R has said there is widespread disagreement with YBS’ decision. But I must be clear that my role is to consider his individual complaint and only his losses. Other affected persons within his local community and their losses are not something I can consider as part of his complaint. Account providers such as building societies have a broad discretion to decide where and how they want to operate. The subject matter of whether limitations should be imposed on them in terms of their physical presence or lack thereof is really a matter appropriate for Parliament or the financial regulator to consider. While I appreciate what Mr R has said and I have no doubt the loss of the agency is very important to him, it’s not my role to dictate that YBS should or shouldn’t have a physical presence in his community. YBS published information about the then forthcoming agency closure on its website and gave its reasons for doing so. I understand Mr R disputes some of the reasons and grounds YBS set out. He thinks there has been insufficient care taken in reaching its decision. But YBS ultimately decided it no longer wanted to provide a service in the area he lives, and I find this was within the legitimate bounds of its commercial discretion.

-- 1 of 2 --

Mr R doesn’t want to use online banking, and there are less options available to him regarding a physical account provider due to where he lives. But I don’t find YBS needed to keep an agency open so he could use their services in the same way he could before the closure. Neither do I see there are no other options available to him with other providers where he lives, although I appreciate they are more limited in number. I do not require YBS to change their decision. My final decision My final decision is I do not uphold Mr R’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr R to accept or reject my decision before 25 May 2026. Liam King Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --