5% one-year fix, Nottingham BS?

veryintrigued

MissyD wrote: »

That's all good and well IF you live in the area, however from where I am in Greater London it's still discrimination, to be honest I don't think it's fair in the slightest & the more of these accounts I see, the more I want to go to fighting this all the way as discrimination like a certain man did about Car Insurance Premiums a few years ago, even though that was based on statistics!
It's like a flipping post code lottery I never signed up for!

Discrimination? Its called a business model.

Please do keep this thread up to date if you 'go to fighting all the way' on the fact that Nottingham Building Society only want to serve the local Nottingham (and a little further) area.

Discrimination? Thats set my day off with a smile!

:rotfl:

saintalan

MissyD wrote: »

Ok, good luck!! I might do the same...

However, I opened top paying CASH ISA with Coventry BS yesterday ...

Morning MissyD have you been up all night!

I assume you are saying you will try and open 2 and only fund the one you prefer?

As for Discrimination I am inclined to agree but I guess little different ,for example, than my LA offering a loyalty card to residents only.

Hope you get what you want.

Cheers

Alan

MissyD_2

veryintrigued wrote: »

Discrimination? Its called a business model.

Please do keep this thread up to date if you 'go to fighting all the way' on the fact that Nottingham Building Society only want to serve the local Nottingham (and a little further) area.

Discrimination? Thats set my day off with a smile!

:rotfl:

It's not just Nottingham BS (otherwise I might not be so annoyed!)
Discrimination because one must live somewhere specific/with x miles of x or have children to be a family! What will they discriminate on savers for next? Ethnicity? Sex? Age? Existing Wealth? Marital Status?
My point is in 2013 and the current market, banks/BS should not nor should they be allowed to discriminate at this level.
I appreciate the need for specialised accounts for Children or Pensioner's even the loyalty accounts, e.g. better savings rates if you bank with us already, but the discrimination regardless of what the reason I do believe is wholly wrong and should not be allowed!

Do we actually want to recover from this recession any time soon?
As I have no intentions of spending like the government is relying on until I have bought my house, as far as I can see thus far, the government, banks and BS are making that simply harder and harder for me to save in the first instance and then actually have somewhere with a decent interest rate I can deposit my life savings into!

MissyD_2

saintalan wrote: »

Morning MissyD have you been up all night!

I assume you are saying you will try and open 2 and only fund the one you prefer?

As for Discrimination I am inclined to agree but I guess little different ,for example, than my LA offering a loyalty card to residents only.

Hope you get what you want.

Cheers

Alan

Good Morning SaintAlan!
Nope! But certainly feels like it!!!
Exactly, fund the one paying more tax free interest obv!
I have one of those too!;)
I also have a lovely Regular saver from 1st Direct @ 8% (gross) because I bank with them, for this "loyalty" (ok they probably know I switched to them for the 8%!) I get a preferential rate, which seems fair NOT DISCRIMINATING AGAINST SPECIFIC DEMO GRAPHS to me but as for random things like my postcode or if I meet their definition of a family by having kids seems clear cut discrimination!

What difference does any of that make to money I can afford to save and rate of interest on these savings?

I just happened to have been brought up in Greater London all my life...... incidentally, I doubt I would earn as much I do in Surrey outside the M25 thus living near one of these branches would mean I wouldn't have enough money to open of their accounts in the first place!

veryintrigued

MissyD wrote: »

It's not just Nottingham BS (otherwise I might not be so annoyed!)
Discrimination because one must live somewhere specific/with x miles of x or have children to be a family! What will they discriminate on savers for next? Ethnicity? Sex? Age? Existing Wealth? Marital Status?
My point is in 2013 and the current market, banks/BS should not nor should they be allowed to discriminate at this level.
I appreciate the need for specialised accounts for Children or Pensioner's even the loyalty accounts, e.g. better savings rates if you bank with us already, but the discrimination regardless of what the reason I do believe is wholly wrong and should not be allowed!

Do we actually want to recover from this recession any time soon?
As I have no intentions of spending like the government is relying on until I have bought my house, as far as I can see thus far, the government, banks and BS are making that simply harder and harder for me to save in the first instance and then actually have somewhere with a decent interest rate I can deposit my life savings into!

This is one of the most bonkers entries I've ever seen on here.

Am sorry you're unable to bank at Notts - I'm also sorry that you've somehow made the connection of this refusal to the recovery of the recession. Finally I'm sorry that you dont know that institutions already 'discriminate' (or use as a factor) existing wealth.

Please keep posting.

saintalan

veryintrigued wrote: »

This is one of the most bonkers entries I've ever seen on here.

Am sorry you're unable to bank at Notts - I'm also sorry that you've somehow made the connection of this refusal to the recovery of the recession. Finally I'm sorry that you dont know that institutions already 'discriminate' (or use as a factor) existing wealth.

Please keep posting.

I enjoy the banter, we need a little lightheartedness in all the confusion;-))

marathonic

MissyD wrote: »

I don't think it's fair in the slightest & the more of these accounts I see, the more I want to go to fighting this all the way as discrimination like a certain man did about Car Insurance Premiums a few years ago

:rotfl:

You could try......

It is against the law to discriminate against anyone because of:

age
being or becoming a transsexual person
being married or in a civil partnership
being pregnant or having a child
disability
race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin
religion, belief or lack of religion/belief
sex
sexual orientation

These are called ‘protected characteristics’.

I don't see the locality where you live being a factor with regards to discrimination in the eyes of the law. Also, age is actually excluded in certain cases, with Financial Services being one of the excluded areas.

MissyD_2

veryintrigued wrote: »

This is one of the most bonkers entries I've ever seen on here.

Am sorry you're unable to bank at Notts - I'm also sorry that you've somehow made the connection of this refusal to the recovery of the recession. Finally I'm sorry that you dont know that institutions already 'discriminate' (or use as a factor) existing wealth.

Please keep posting.

Sorry I wasn't clear, the government want us to spend to plough money back into the economy to aid its recovery, getting out of a 5/6 year recession, correct?
My point is I am FTB, trying to bank £20-25k in about 18-24 months so I can have a minimum 10% deposit & legal fees etc on my first house (bearing in mind I first enquired about a Mortgage at 18, I'm almost 32!), so I wont be spending any of my money now apart from essential living costs, I'm saving more than I am spending, so why then am I penalised on interest rates??
Obviously, I will need to buy and spend a lot when I get my new house......however, my spending contribution will probably be too late if they carry on at this rate, is the point I was trying to get at.

Existing wealth being a factor is understandable (to a certain extent), e.g. minimum opening deposits for certain accounts for top rates, I get (although not when its 3% for £+40k!) or where it makes complete sense is credit checks e.t.c on borrowing.
My existing wealth has not been taken into consideration as they already discriminated me out of the 'race'!
But I dont know enough about the law to start this fight alone!
///end rant (sorry!)

marathonic

MissyD wrote: »

I'm saving more than I am spending, so why then am I penalised on interest rates??

Simple, it's NOTHING to do with the government - if they had influence, they'd drop rates to 0% or charge you to hold cash so that you'd go out and spend to increase business profits and increase their tax intake.

Interest Rates are decided based on each individual banks funding requirements. For example, if Santander's upper management decided that they want to double mortgage lending in 2013/14, they'd need to increase their cash reserves to the minimum level required to support that level of lending. There are complex calculations required to come up with the cash reserve requirement and, for example, a 90% LTV mortgage requires 6-7 times more reserves than a 60% LTV mortgage.

Traditionally, one of the best ways to rapidly increase cash reserves would have been to offer a best buy ISA that accepts Transfers In. However, banks can now avail of extremely cheap money via the Funding For Lending scheme - much cheaper than the rates they would have been paying out on ISA's over the past few years. Therefore, most banks don't really have a need to offer a Best Buy ISA.

MissyD_2

marathonic wrote: »

Simple, it's NOTHING to do with the government - if they had influence, they'd drop rates to 0% or charge you to hold cash so that you'd go out and spend to increase business profits and increase their tax intake.
However, banks can now avail of extremely cheap money via the Funding For Lending scheme - much cheaper than the rates they would have been paying out on ISA's over the past few years. Therefore, most banks don't really have a need to offer a Best Buy ISA.

Yes it is everything to do with the GOVERNMENT because the GOVERNMENT created Funding For Lending scheme, which in turn means the banks don't need our money because of the GOVERNMENT's Funding For Lending Scheme!