MSE News: Government continues simple financial products crusade

CLAPTON

SnowMan wrote: »

I don't respect your right to have a complicated product available to you if having complicated products causes significant detriment to others. It is about balancing the rights of all not just you. As Martin said in his blog people with learning difficulties and others who don't understand complicated products through no fault of their own have rights and I would agree with that.

However it is not down to me to decide what products should be available it is down to the rules that a democratically voted government of the day decide. However I and you are entitled to give our own views on what products should be available.

The test, in my view if I am allowed to express it, to decide whether a product or marketing is acceptable is whether the product or marketing is overcomplicated and whether it is intended to deceive people, not whether people understand it. However simple you make products some people won't understand. However the simpler a product is the more chance that more people will understand a product.

Percentages, regular savers and inflation linked savings are not in themselves there to complicate or deceive so no I wouldn't ban them unless they were set up or used in a way that was intended to deceive etc.

nonsense, virtually the sole reason regular savings exist is to deceive

if you knew much about the subject you will know why

it would also be worthwhile to ponder the difference betweeen democracy and liberty


however the saving grace is that the government inititive is just a lot of grandstanding which will be quietly forgotten; a bit like it's initiative to 'reduce' utility bills (shop around)

opinions4u

CLAPTON wrote: »

nonsense, virtually the sole reason regular savings exist is to deceive

I suppose that depends on how you define the deception.

Most (decent) regular saver accounts are loss leaders in their own right. They are commonly used to attract new savers who invest a bit (over 12 months) in the regular saver in the hope that their tens of thousands will land in a less excting account.

I don't think that's deceptive. I do think the basic lack of understanding that so many people display to the procuct ("I should have had 8% on the £3,000 that was there after 12 months even though the average balance was only £1,500") has more to do with a complete lack of common sense than any attempt to deceive on the part of the provider.

It's little different to offering Tetley Tea at full price to get a 5p off petrol voucher and hoping that the buyer will do their £100 weekly shop at the same time as chasing down the cheap fuel.

What the difference of opinions in this thread show is that too many people are too lazy to find out what their financial products do / don't do, how much they cost and what alternatives there are. Simplifying product would make absolutely no difference to this malaise in British society.

however the saving grace is that the government inititive is just a lot of grandstanding which will be quietly forgotten; a bit like it's initiative to 'reduce' utility bills (shop around)

This sort of nanny state initiative perpetuates the malaise I refer to above.

darkpool

SnowMan wrote: »

I don't respect your right to have a complicated product available to you if having complicated products causes significant detriment to others. It is about balancing the rights of all not just you. As Martin said in his blog people with learning difficulties and others who don't understand complicated products through no fault of their own have rights and I would agree with that.

you really think financial products should be curtailed because some members of society can't understand them?

jimjames

darkpool wrote: »

you really think financial products should be curtailed because some members of society can't understand them?

Judging by the number of questions on them ISAs would probably be first to go then!