Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
Page 48
    • RaspberryFool
    • By RaspberryFool 8th Jul 15, 8:11 AM
    • 54 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    RaspberryFool
    Reduction in amount of protection
    The article does not appear to address the question of how much protection is offered to accounts that were opened BEFORE the limit was changed but where the provider went bust AFTER the limit changed. Customers with, for example, fixed rate bonds cannot simply transfer out of their existing provider to ensure that they stay under the limit. If they took out an account with the certainty that £85k would be protected but now find that only £75k is protected, they would feel like they had been robbed by the government if the worse happened. (Makes a change I suppose.)
    RF
    RaspberryFool
    Men are from Mars, Women are from ... Cadburys!
    • colsten
    • By colsten 8th Jul 15, 9:16 AM
    • 8,144 Posts
    • 6,638 Thanks
    colsten
    The article does not appear to address the question of how much protection is offered to accounts that were opened BEFORE the limit was changed but where the provider went bust AFTER the limit changed. Customers with, for example, fixed rate bonds cannot simply transfer out of their existing provider to ensure that they stay under the limit. If they took out an account with the certainty that £85k would be protected but now find that only £75k is protected, they would feel like they had been robbed by the government if the worse happened. (Makes a change I suppose.)
    RF
    Originally posted by RaspberryFool
    The change only applies from January 2016 onwards. How existing fixed term accounts with more than £75K will be handled is still subject to consultation with the financial services industry. Nobody will get robbed.
    • RaspberryFool
    • By RaspberryFool 18th Aug 15, 3:10 PM
    • 54 Posts
    • 29 Thanks
    RaspberryFool
    It would seem that some providers are allowing a one-off withdrawal without penalty on restricted access accounts in order to let the customer reduce their holding to less than £75k.
    RF
    RaspberryFool
    Men are from Mars, Women are from ... Cadburys!
    • colsten
    • By colsten 18th Aug 15, 3:30 PM
    • 8,144 Posts
    • 6,638 Thanks
    colsten
    It would seem that some providers are allowing a one-off withdrawal without penalty on restricted access accounts in order to let the customer reduce their holding to less than £75k.
    RF
    Originally posted by RaspberryFool
    Some may be a bit quicker off the mark than others, but all of them will have to offer this.
  • IcelandicWarrior
    What about loss of tax free status
    I have an ISA with over 75k in it and the provider has written advising I can make one withdrawal with no penalty. However, they state the the funds withdrawn are sent as a cheque. This means I lose 10k of tax free savings. Does anyone know if there is any means to avoid this other than leaving the funds in place until the investment comes to term and I can transfer some to another ISA?
    • colsten
    • By colsten 24th Aug 15, 7:53 PM
    • 8,144 Posts
    • 6,638 Thanks
    colsten
    Complain.

    They must offer you the option of an ISA transfer for the £10K.

    Although you could probably earn more interest outside an ISA for £10K
    • Sillychuckie
    • By Sillychuckie 29th Aug 15, 11:21 PM
    • 1,100 Posts
    • 264 Thanks
    Sillychuckie
    I have an offset savings acount (it offsets a mortgage with the same provider), with a balance in excess of the 85k.
    It is a seperate account, but is 'linked' so the interest on it is deducted from my mortgage balance.

    e.g.
    I owe £150k on a mortgage.
    By keeping £150k in the offset savings account, I pay no interest on the mortgage.

    If the institution went under (so they take my 150k savings), am I then settled on my mortgage?
    Or - can someone buy the debt and say I still owe the 150k?

    If this is true, surely any offset mortgage with an offset facility containing a balance > 75k is at risk of loss?
    Doesn't this really devalue the benefits of offset mortgages?

    I'm worried now.
    SC.
    • sjp1966
    • By sjp1966 14th Apr 16, 9:58 AM
    • 64 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    sjp1966
    Nutmeg
    Apologies if this is in the wrong place but I couldn't see an option that would be a better fit.

    I currently have a paltry cash ISA with Santander which pays a negligable amount of interest, that year is now up and I am thinking of putting the money into a Cash ISA with Nutmeg

    I am just trying to find some opinions on Nutmeg in terms of what they are like, do I have any form of protection through them in terms of my initial investment amount?

    Thanks
    • george4064
    • By george4064 14th Apr 16, 10:21 AM
    • 579 Posts
    • 614 Thanks
    george4064
    Apologies if this is in the wrong place but I couldn't see an option that would be a better fit.

    I currently have a paltry cash ISA with Santander which pays a negligable amount of interest, that year is now up and I am thinking of putting the money into a Cash ISA with Nutmeg

    I am just trying to find some opinions on Nutmeg in terms of what they are like, do I have any form of protection through them in terms of my initial investment amount?

    Thanks
    Originally posted by sjp1966
    Read here, from Nutmeg's website: https://www.nutmeg.com/legal/terms-and-conditions
    "If you aren’t willing to own a stock for ten years, don’t even think about owning it for ten minutes” Warren Buffett

    Save £12k in 2016 - #045
    • sjp1966
    • By sjp1966 14th Apr 16, 10:26 AM
    • 64 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    sjp1966
    Thanks George for the link, that explains one aspect, do you have any experience with Nutmeg in order to offer any general opinions on their service?
    • george4064
    • By george4064 14th Apr 16, 10:29 AM
    • 579 Posts
    • 614 Thanks
    george4064
    Thanks George for the link, that explains one aspect, do you have any experience with Nutmeg in order to offer any general opinions on their service?
    Originally posted by sjp1966
    I do not have any personal experience with them, but what I do know is that they're expensive for what they are (simply passive 'robo-advice' ETF portfolios).

    You will be paying (relatively) an arm and a leg for that 'advice', whereas you could just construct your own passive ETF portfolio and pay about 0.07% total charges, nutmeg will be more like 1% total charges.
    "If you aren’t willing to own a stock for ten years, don’t even think about owning it for ten minutes” Warren Buffett

    Save £12k in 2016 - #045
    • sjp1966
    • By sjp1966 14th Apr 16, 10:33 AM
    • 64 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    sjp1966
    Ahh interesting to know, thanks for the heads up on that.
    • bigadaj
    • By bigadaj 14th Apr 16, 10:55 AM
    • 7,822 Posts
    • 4,768 Thanks
    bigadaj
    I do not have any personal experience with them, but what I do know is that they're expensive for what they are (simply passive 'robo-advice' ETF portfolios).

    You will be paying (relatively) an arm and a leg for that 'advice', whereas you could just construct your own passive ETF portfolio and pay about 0.07% total charges, nutmeg will be more like 1% total charges.
    Originally posted by george4064
    Lifestrategy, consensus or multi index would be a lot simpler for someone inexperienced, even if they are a little more expensive.
    • sjp1966
    • By sjp1966 14th Apr 16, 11:09 AM
    • 64 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    sjp1966
    Lifestrategy, consensus or multi index would be a lot simpler for someone inexperienced, even if they are a little more expensive.
    Originally posted by bigadaj
    bigadaj I am inexperienced in the world of investments for sure. if the fees are 1% compared to 0.7% then, with the amounts I have, the 0.3% wouldn't amount to masses.

    I am trying to find out what the company is like in general, their website seems appealing as it is written in a way that appeals to a layman and I am very much a layman on these things.

    However even with the small amount I have I don't want to drop all the money in there and then find they are not that good or my money just dwindles and disappears (I Know there is an element of risk in investments)
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 14th Apr 16, 11:52 AM
    • 85,111 Posts
    • 50,130 Thanks
    dunstonh
    Ahh interesting to know, thanks for the heads up on that.
    Originally posted by sjp1966
    do a forum search for nutmeg focusing on the investment and ISA section. You will see several threads with useful information.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from a Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Eco Miser
    • By Eco Miser 14th Apr 16, 7:02 PM
    • 2,442 Posts
    • 2,257 Thanks
    Eco Miser
    bigadaj I am inexperienced in the world of investments for sure. if the fees are 1% compared to 0.7% then, with the amounts I have, the 0.3% wouldn't amount to masses.
    Originally posted by sjp1966
    Putting it another way, since 1% is 142% of 0.7%, you would be paying an additional 42% of the fee payable at 0.7% - but george4064 quoted 0.07% so that's an increase in fee of around 1320%.

    The actual £ amounts may not be much different to begin with, but compounded over a lifetime, that's a lot of money you won't be getting.
    Eco Miser
    Saving money for well over half a century
    • sjp1966
    • By sjp1966 15th Apr 16, 8:53 AM
    • 64 Posts
    • 12 Thanks
    sjp1966
    Putting it another way, since 1% is 142% of 0.7%, you would be paying an additional 42% of the fee payable at 0.7% - but george4064 quoted 0.07% so that's an increase in fee of around 1320%.

    The actual £ amounts may not be much different to begin with, but compounded over a lifetime, that's a lot of money you won't be getting.
    Originally posted by Eco Miser
    Good point, at nearly 50 there is not masses of lifetime left but I get the point, I've decided not to go with them. My Cousin is an IFA so ill get some free advise from him.
    • bigadaj
    • By bigadaj 15th Apr 16, 9:11 AM
    • 7,822 Posts
    • 4,768 Thanks
    bigadaj
    bigadaj I am inexperienced in the world of investments for sure. if the fees are 1% compared to 0.7% then, with the amounts I have, the 0.3% wouldn't amount to masses.

    I am trying to find out what the company is like in general, their website seems appealing as it is written in a way that appeals to a layman and I am very much a layman on these things.

    However even with the small amount I have I don't want to drop all the money in there and then find they are not that good or my money just dwindles and disappears (I Know there is an element of risk in investments)
    Originally posted by sjp1966
    As pointed out by others the etc costs could be 0.07%, but to compare like with like I believe you can hold nutmeg directly with them rather than using another platform. The platform would probably add 0,25% to the costs so the etfs total costs would be around 0.32%, though it would mean that you could hold a range of varied assets rather than just one offering.

    Using one of the fettered fund of funds I suggested would give a cost of around 0.25% basic, so total cost of 0.5% but they auto rebalance for you, meaning that you don't have to go back every year and buy and sell bits to get the benefits of selling high and buying low, much easier for many.
    • TightwadSteve
    • By TightwadSteve 12th Oct 16, 11:39 PM
    • 3 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    TightwadSteve
    Don't know if this thread is still active but I can't find any definition of how this protection works if my 2 kids (under 16) have separate savings accounts, and as these have to be under an adults supervision, but the accounts do still have the kids own names on the account. Do they get their own £75k protection each , or is it all considered as part of the parents protection allowance?.
    thanks
    • colsten
    • By colsten 13th Oct 16, 12:01 AM
    • 8,144 Posts
    • 6,638 Thanks
    colsten
    I would say the full £75K protection applies to each of your kids, independent of yourself, as the protection applies to persons, and you'd hope children are considered persons: https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/COMP/4/2.html#D10

    Don't take my word for it though - best you get it confirmed in writing by the FSCS.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

5,294Posts Today

8,799Users online

Martin's Twitter