Which uk banks are safer in the eurozone crisis?

ChuckCash

Ok, so the 85k compensation scheme is supposed to reassure us that it doesn't really matter which bank our savings are in regarding safety, but the reality is never so simple, especially in such extraordinary circumstances.

I'm not trying to start a run on the banks, but i'm interested in opinions as to which institutions are less exposed to the weaker eurozone economies (including spain and italy).

Personally I'm considering Northern Rock and Nationwide as two relatively safe options, but it's hunches and guesswork. Failing that, the mattress, though not inflation-proof, has minimum euro exposure.

Anyone with more informed opinions, please shine your light.

Masomnia

AFAIK Lloyds and RBS are more exposed than the others.

Your safer bets may be the likes of HSBC which do a much larger chunk of their business in Asia.

Having said that, there's no reason I can see at the moment to worry about your savings.

SeniorSam

You already know that you have protection for up to £85,000 in any one institition, so if the amount of savings/investments is within that, go for the best rate of growth you can and stop worrying about something that will not happen. You can always switch to other banks as required

Sam

ChuckCash

That's assuming the FSCS has sufficient capacity to cover any eventuality, or as a last resort the government will always take up the slack with no exception.

I'm not overly concerned, but there's no harm in favouring institutions deemed to be less exposed - especially when the difference in returns can be marginal.

rageagainstessays

Apparently from what I've heard the Coventry is pretty safe.

ses6jwg

Oh god, not another one of the tin foil hat brigade.

You are guaranteed up to £85k with any UK bank. Full Stop.

If a bank as big as Lloyds, RBS, Santander, collapses, you can forget worrying about getting your money back and start worrying about the hoards of people rioting outside in the street.

ChuckCash

ses6jwg wrote: »

Oh god, not another one of the tin foil hat brigade.

Probably that very same profound phrase was muttered before, only in Icelandic, before the rioting on the streets that is.

Like I said earlier, I'm not overly concerned, but unless an exposed bank is offering a noticeably better return, I'll choose an institution I have more confidence in. Grabbing the bacowrap now...

Lokolo

ChuckCash wrote: »

Probably that very same profound phrase was muttered before, only in Icelandic, before the rioting on the streets that is.

Like I said earlier, I'm not overly concerned, but unless an exposed bank is offering a noticeably better return, I'll choose an institution I have more confidence in. Grabbing the bacowrap now...

That's because people are stupid.

lisyloo

If you can tie up your money for 12 months then NSI index linked savings certificates may be a good bet.
They are guaranteed to beat RPI and are backed by HM treasury and tax free.

You can get your money out within the first 12 months you jsut won't get a return, but in an emergency you canget to your money.

ChuckCash

lisyloo wrote: »

If you can tie up your money for 12 months then NSI index linked savings certificates may be a good bet.
They are guaranteed to beat RPI and are backed by HM treasury and tax free.

Thanks lisyloo, an NSI product that offers a reasonably competitive return. It's a pitty about the £15,000 per issue maximum but a good option nonetheless.

lisyloo

I know a couple can have £60K because as well as their own allowances they can put £15K in trust for each other. It sounds like a loophole but it's true.
I don't know how that works out if you are single. I guess you would need someone you really trust. Mum? Dad?