Have the savers not learned nothing

chopperharris

Given that the "meltdown" of the icelandic banks are still in our memory then why are savers still doing the same thing that NEARLY got them burned , ie chasing a higher rate of interest with foreign owned banks?

The eu is telling us to break up our banks that we taxpayers bailed out to prevent a repeat of banks failing , to make them more competitve they say , yet the iceland banks were considerably smaller and the most competitive and went down faster than a crack hooker on pay day.

Will we ever learn?

Reaper

I think most people have learnt the lesson that it is best to stay within the FSCS limits. You seem to have learnt a different lesson, that UK banks are somehow safer. But remember large numbers of UK banks failed. Furthermore most of the ones you would probably consider British are now owned by foreign banks like Santander because they were not so reckless.

Overlarge banks are a hazard to the economy because they are "too big to fail". The icelandic banks had foreign assets 10 times the value of GDP, let alone liabilities.

Personally I'm in favour of smaller banks so when their gambles go wrong we can afford to let them fail.

Jonbvn

!!!!!!,

CH, given your pathetic grammar who can take you seriously?

Must be cold in your mum's back room?

Just in case you're confused:

Have the savers not learned ANYTHING;);)

chopperharris

Jonbvn wrote: »

!!!!!!,

CH, given your pathetic grammar who can take you seriously?

Must be cold in your mum's back room?

Just in case you're confused:

Have the savers not learned ANYTHING;);)

I have enough grammar to be mortgage/debt free and almost retired before the age 40 , and no not in mums room.:beer:

Grammar nazis , mean "anything" to me.;) but i could be worse I cld hv txtd .:eek:

Its an internet forum , i dumb down so i can type and watch soaps at the same time innit , i do correct the kids when they are writing on my walls though.

Ian_W

chopperharris wrote: »

i do correct the kids when they are writing on my walls though.

Do you use a spelchequer
or
just give 'em a slap! :eek:

ManAtHome

Sorry, which foreign-owned banks do you think savers are piling into?

chopperharris

ManAtHome wrote: »

Sorry, which foreign-owned banks do you think savers are piling into?

citibank , ing , post office BOI , investec , bank of cyprus , icici , santander- with abbey, bradford and bingley , alliance and leicester.

Ifts

chopperharris wrote: »

citibank , ing , post office BOI , investec , bank of cyprus , icici , santander- with abbey, bradford and bingley , alliance and leicester.

A lot of the ones you mention above are 100% covered by the UK's FSCS
(not part of the passport exception).
As you can see here: http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/safe-savings#foreign

chopperharris

Ifts wrote: »

A lot of the ones you mention above are 100% covered by the UK's FSCS
(not part of the passport exception).
As you can see here: http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/safe-savings#foreign

yes and we know how well that works!Remember the whole terrorism law on icelandic banks uk accounts because they tried to not pay up?

This scheme that means a foreign bank operating here after going under has the same customer insurance as a uk one , but come creditor asset claming time the fscs cant get their money back and then using their own national laws any that they do get back would be well under the claim limit for each saver.So basically the uk pays up twice.

But hey the eu tells us how to operate our banks anyway.

Ifts

chopperharris wrote: »

This scheme that means a foreign bank operating here after going under has the same customer insurance as a uk one , but come creditor asset claming time the fscs cant get their money back and then using their own national laws any that they do get back would be well under the claim limit for each saver.So basically the uk pays up twice.

I'm sorry but I don't understand what your getting at? Maybe the title of your thread should have been Have the FSCS not learned anything instead of Have the savers not learned nothing.

What I have learned is to stay within the compensation limits of whatever financial institution I save with, and my only concern is to be able to get my funds back in the event should they fail.

Reaper

I'm not sure what you are going on about here. "Ifts" said most of the ones you were mentioned were 100% FSCS, not Passport Exemption. At which point you went on about one that was Passport Exemption...

chopperharris wrote: »

yes and we know how well that works!Remember the whole terrorism law on icelandic banks uk accounts because they tried to not pay up?

Not only that but in the case of Icesave the FSCS paid up in full beyond even the FSCS limits - an interesting precedent which was repeated later. A lesson for savers you seem to have missed.

This scheme that means a foreign bank operating here after going under has the same customer insurance as a uk one , but come creditor asset claming time the fscs cant get their money back and then using their own national laws any that they do get back would be well under the claim limit for each saver.So basically the uk pays up twice.

I'm confused by what you are trying to say. If they are part of the FSCS scheme then they pay into it as insurance in case anyone in the group fails.

I think you must be referring to Passport Exemption again. So if, for example ING went bankrupt and the Dutch refused to pay up. Unlikely. Iceland only tried to get out of it because their entire economy was up the spout, and in any case they have now agreed to refund us.