barclays

warrior_princess

looks like barclays is on shaky ground ................i ve an offset/current ac mortgage with them..........with all my savings in offset acc .................what do everyone think?

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5563223.ece

Really2

warrior_princess wrote: »

looks like barclays is on shaky ground ................i ve an offset/current ac mortgage with them..........with all my savings in offset acc .................what do everyone think?

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5563223.ece

Even if they went your savings would be offset aginst the mortgage, so your savings are safe as they would reduce your mortgage if they went bump.

Generali

warrior_princess wrote: »

looks like barclays is on shaky ground ................i ve an offset/current ac mortgage with them..........with all my savings in offset acc .................what do everyone think?

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article5563223.ece

The amount in the offset (if your signature is up to date) is well below the GBP50,000 guarantee so you shouldn't have a problem.

If Barclays go bust they be nationalised and just become another part of the massive bill the UK taxpayer has to find.

If the Government can't bail out Barclays because they're insolvent you're going to have bigger problems than your mortgage.

Really2

Generali wrote: »

The amount in the offset (if your signature is up to date) is well below the GBP50,000 guarantee so you shouldn't have a problem.

If Barclays go bust they be nationalised and just become another part of the massive bill the UK taxpayer has to find.

If the Government can't bail out Barclays because they're insolvent you're going to have bigger problems than your mortgage.

I am not sure that is true on an offset genrali i belive if they go the whole amount can be offset.
But I may be, wrong but I am sure that is what I read?
Got it
http://www.fool.co.uk/news/property-home/mortgages/2008/04/11/be-careful-with-offset-mortgages.aspx

If a bank were to go into default, the FSCS would consider the overall net claim. If the claimant's borrowings exceeded his/her savings, there would be no overall claim against the bank, and the claimant would not be entitled to any compensation.
For example, if a customer had a mortgage of £200,000 and savings of £150,000 with the same bank, set-off would be applied to the example above by the Insolvency Practitioner dealing with the bank failure. As a result, the individual would end up owing the bank £50,000. There would be no positive balance and no claim.
That Is why i offset as i wanted a safe place for my savings (well safe as paying off my mortgage)

Generali

Really2 wrote: »

I am not sure that is true on an offset genrali i belive if they go the whole amount can be offset.
But I may be, wrong but I am sure that is what I read?
Got it
http://www.fool.co.uk/news/property-home/mortgages/2008/04/11/be-careful-with-offset-mortgages.aspx

If a bank were to go into default, the FSCS would consider the overall net claim. If the claimant's borrowings exceeded his/her savings, there would be no overall claim against the bank, and the claimant would not be entitled to any compensation.
For example, if a customer had a mortgage of £200,000 and savings of £150,000 with the same bank, set-off would be applied to the example above by the Insolvency Practitioner dealing with the bank failure. As a result, the individual would end up owing the bank £50,000. There would be no positive balance and no claim.
That Is why i offset as i wanted a safe place for my savings (well safe as paying off my mortgage)

I've seen claims to the contrary (I think on fool.co.uk too!!!) and don't really know.

The Government seems to be setting out it's stall for the next election as selling a set of policies where nobody will ever lose money again in the UK apart from shareholders. I have my doubts as to the feasibility of this....

Really2

Generali wrote: »

I've seen claims to the contrary (I think on fool.co.uk too!!!) and don't really know.

The Government seems to be setting out it's stall for the next election as selling a set of policies where nobody will ever lose money again in the UK apart from shareholders. I have my doubts as to the feasibility of this....

I think on that article it says they mis-informed people. That is the clarification off the FSCS.

chopperharris

If its true about the abu dabi deal then I dont think it will be touched with a barge pole for nationalisation....the hand of hmg offer was bitten.They chose the arab route for refinancing because they didnt want to open their books to hmg.It would be cheaper for hmg to help the savers keep their deposits thats in barcs than to nationalise it , ie top up the scheme.....and that will happen instead.

If there is to be a big un thats to go down , then barcs are it , or the arab money investors will have to do it and take up another rights issue.

I warned about barcs for long enough , they were too busy keeping shareholders and especially the directors in the money on closed books.Some things in their operation didnt add up to me two years ago.....and that was goodo enough for me to steer well clear of it as an investment.....and for my deposits.