Regular Savers, a waste of time...

Mikeyorks

As with all Savings products ..... you need to do your homework before you jump in? Clearly your's is an 'after the event' evaluation ...... which isn't really much good. Regular Savers do need organisation + the foresight to only commit (most permit variation of the monthly sum) money you can tie in for the period.

But it certainly doesn't make them 'a waste of time'. 7% to 12% (my current RS's) .... isn't to be sneezed at in the current climate.

dancingfairy

My OH found it really useful - he funded them each month and the money left his current account and he didn't really miss it. He was pleasantly surprised how it had all mounted up and he hadn't had the temptation to spend it. It gave him the saving bug. Lol.
df

Sooler

I think the regular saver was the wrong product, as said these are for people to make regular savings. You already had your savings, yet chose to earn zilch on them, while trasferring them bit by bit to a regular saver account.

Moving £250 a month from any other account needs no more organization than moving it from an HSBC current account.

Milarky

Mr_K wrote: »

The other major con is that your money is 'tied up'. If you need it, good bye Regular Saver (or at least those were the terms with the HSBC). I can see how they might be useful for some people but I'll be sticking to an instant access account.

This contradicts the previous complaint however - that you can put 'so little' (relative to savings capacity?) into most regular savings accounts due to the restrictions. If the amount of money being saved is significant relative to potential then you have to be that much more organised I suppose - but if it isn't did you really need every last penny on instant access terms?

And to echo Lavendyr, every regular saver is different from the next - different horses for different courses with some allowing penalty free access, some allowing a limited number of withdrawals, some no withdrawals, some with tie-in accounts.. and so on. Even the 'best' MSE saver will get caught out by some of these accounts. But then that's where all the help is generally available from here before you sign on the dotted line for a particular account.

cloud_dog

How many times do we have these conversations............... A regular savings account is supplemenatary to a decent savings account.

opinions4u

Perhaps instead of having a Regular Savings account the OP should have left their savings in a current account earning, perhaps, 0.1% interest.

Where I come from getting 10% interest on my money is worth more than getting 0.1% on my money. Leave that £3k in HSBC and earn £2.40 after tax or settle for the £128 "waste of time"? I know which is better! Even if you'd fed the £250 a month in to a 6% account with access you'd have only got £77 interest.

Depends on the individual circumstances - is the extra £51 worth it for giving up decent access?

Most of these accounts offer:

1) A good rate of interest
2) A get out clause (subject to losing a chunk of that interest via a reduced rate)
3) A genuine incentive to save

For a lot of people simply getting the savings habit is the most important thing. They fritter their hard earned cash away on Meal Deals, Starbucks etc etc and don't realise that they have chucked away £3,000 on stuff they really didn't need!

Make your butties at home, drink water at work and save a fortune at a high rate!

Regular savings accounts are superb! If I didn't already have two on the go I'd open one now - ideal to have something maturing just before Christmas!

caracal_77

cloud_dog wrote: »

How many times do we have these conversations............... A regular savings account is supplemenatary to a decent savings account.

That's true, if you have the money up front. If not, and one would like to save regularly and get into the habit of saving, regular savers are excellent.

As others said, you need to choose the right product for you.

caracal_77

Mr_K wrote: »

I've come to the conclusion that Regular Savers are a waste of time. For example, I had one with the HSBC at 10%. I put the maximum £250 in a month for a year and came out with £3,128 (£128 interest). I was dissapointed with this but understand how interest on these these accounts work. (If I'd put the £3K in a 6% saving account for the year I'd have got more and been able to withdraw/deposit as needed).

The headline interest rate is largely irrelevant, more important is the amount you can put in each month and the term of the account. I'm sure a lot up people must sign up to these 'dazzled' by the interest rate. Banks should also publish exactly how much you'll get at the end...

I suppose they might be useful if you're saving for something but I won't be using them again.

Mr K, look at the HSBC site: (under "The Essentials")
http://www.hsbc.co.uk/1/2/personal/savings/regular-saver;jsessionid=0000Djn6P1YIi8-tRj70GGWJhdj:12c58sh8k

They give you an example of what you'll get if you put 250.00 per month.

RayWolfe

Mr_K wrote: »

The other major con is that your money is 'tied up'.

Mr K, like most of the media you have fallen into the trap of calling something you don't understand, "a con". There are many cons in this world, some of which are perpetrated by banks. To call monthly savers a con is to misuse the term and deflects people from the real cons!

cowbutt

apt wrote: »

Also a lot of people save out of their monthly salary. But I do agree that despite the high headline interest rate it's more a good way of building up capital than earning a massive amount of interest. The Barclay saver at 7.75% will get you about £100 interest after basic rate tax.

FYI, I was just on the Barclays website for other reasons, and the 7.75% rate has ended now. From 1 December, it's 6%.