The problem is that you used the default parameter values in both cases. Apparently, the default values happened to be better for your data set before scaling (this is a coincidence).
When using SVM, the parameters $c$ and $\gamma$ play a crucial role and it is your task to find the best values. Your intuition is correct: the optimal performance is better when all features are scaled properly (or at least 99.99% of the time). Unfortunately, neither of your settings had optimal parameters which led to a result that seemed to reject your intuition.
Searching the optimal values for $c$ and $\gamma$ is typically done via a grid search (e.g. search a set of $<c,\gamma>$ combinations). You can estimate the performance of an SVM for a given set of parameters using cross-validation.
In pseudo-code, the general idea is this:
for c in {set of possible c values}
for gamma in {set of possible gamma values}
perform k-fold cross-validation to find accuracy
end
end
train svm model on full training set with best c,gamma-pair
You can find a good beginner's tutorial here.