Barclays Golden ISA 3.61%

rb10

Castrovalva wrote: »

BUT - if they did it would generate very bad PR for them so I don't see them doing that any time soon - do you?

But Barclays are hardly that concerned about getting great PR for savings accounts, as (in general) they hardly have the best rates, do they?

Ok, the Regular Saver is good, and the new ISA is ok-ish (but there are better accounts, for most people), but other than that they don't exactly do savings in a big way.

Castrovalva

rb10 wrote: »

But Barclays are hardly that concerned about getting great PR for savings accounts, as (in general) they hardly have the best rates, do they?

Ok, the Regular Saver is good, and the new ISA is ok-ish (but there are better accounts, for most people), but other than that they don't exactly do savings in a big way.

All true. Personally I think it's because of this diverse business approach that they've been able to make a profit and not have to go cap in hand to the tax payer.

Academic

I'm not entirely convinced by the 'profitability' of Barclays. They are currently (according to several newspaper reports) engaged in talks with the Treasury regarding their possible participation in the Asset Protection Scheme, i.e. making use of taxpayers money to 'insure' their so-called toxic assets. They also borrowed £7 billion from Middle Eastern sources at repayment rates greater than those offered by HMG.

It's also interesting to note that whilst they declared £6.1 billion pre-tax profit they also expanded their balance sheet to £900 billion taking their assets and liabilities to more than £2,000 billion.

It's amazing what you can do with corporate accounts.............

Having said all that I'm still a customer and will probably make use of their Golden ISA offer (although I'll shortly be transferring all my money from their Tax Haven ISA once it matures and falls to a lowly rate).

KTF

geet wrote: »

Thanks rb10 for that info - i did not know about Halifax - it looks the best right now. I need to transfer 6K and start new 3K. A fixed 3% with four withdrawals looks like the best option - I have looked into natwest transfers too - it looks complicated. But check first direct 7% - that might be better for new isa.

I will probably do the same. Existing ISAs over to Halifax and this years one to Barclays.

If another product comes out that allows transfers in and is higher than the Halifax then I can always move to that.

If its higher than both Barclays and Halifax (or the interest rates go up over time and Barclays/Halifax become uncompetitive) then I can just move both accounts and combine them again.

Cant lose really.

geet

yes i agree - halifax for transfer and barclays for new if they offer the same golden rate for new ones. as you rightly say as there is no tie-in it can always be transferred if something better comes along.

allthingsmustpass

I recieved a letter from barclays recently as I have a tax haven ISA with them, in it they say:

"if you have subscribed to your cash isa this tax year (2008-09), you will not be able to subscribe to another cash isa in the next tax year (2009-10) if you continue to subscribe to this cash isa in the next tax year."

Which I believe to be blatently false. When they say 'continue to subscribe' do they mean leave the money in the account? Why does that prevent me from putting new money into another isa next year? Ive been doing exactly that for a few years now... Am I mis-interpreting this or do they not understand the legislation surrounding their own products?

BruceyBonus

allthingsmustpass wrote: »

I recieved a letter from barclays recently as I have a tax haven ISA with them, in it they say:

"if you have subscribed to your cash isa this tax year (2008-09), you will not be able to subscribe to another cash isa in the next tax year (2009-10) if you continue to subscribe to this cash isa in the next tax year."

Which I believe to be blatently false. When they say 'continue to subscribe' do they mean leave the money in the account? Why does that prevent me from putting new money into another isa next year? Ive been doing exactly that for a few years now... Am I mis-interpreting this or do they not understand the legislation surrounding their own products?

Continue to subscribe means continue to pay into the ISA. If you don't pay into the ISA in the next tax year, then you haven't subscribed to it.

allthingsmustpass

BruceyBonus wrote: »

Continue to subscribe means continue to pay into the ISA. If you don't pay into the ISA in the next tax year, then you haven't subscribed to it.

Aha! ok thankyou.

I put a lump sum into the isa at the start of the financial year, I didn't know the meaning of the term 'subscribe'. They could just have said 'pay into the account' or something!

Baldur

allthingsmustpass wrote: »

I put a lump sum into the isa at the start of the financial year, I didn't know the meaning of the term 'subscribe'. They could just have said 'pay into the account' or something!

'Subscribe' is the wording used by HMRC for new money being paid into an ISA, so most institutions use the same terminology.

Castrovalva

allthingsmustpass wrote: »

Aha! ok thankyou.

I put a lump sum into the isa at the start of the financial year, I didn't know the meaning of the term 'subscribe'. They could just have said 'pay into the account' or something!

Thats the lawers talking.

"Subscribe" is the legal term for paying into an ISA.