Are Halifax Cash ISAs Fraudulent?

Hooloovoo

pqrdef wrote: »

In other words, it's a deliberate trap.

No it's not. A trap means you don't know what you're walking in to.

A point clearly lost on many posters is that if you deceive, it's not an excuse if you also tell the truth. So appealing to the small print cuts no ice.

I can't remember the last time I saw a bonus rate described in small print. It's clearly spelt out.

In fact, the paragraph "At the end of the bonus period, variable rates without bonus will apply, currently this is 0.25% tax free/AER" is actually presented in a slightly larger font than that used on the rest of the page.

innovate

How is it a trap? How is it deception?

All the facts are on the table, in writing, before you sign up. Nobody puts a gun to your head and makes you sign up. It is your decision, and your decision only, whether you want to take out a savings account with a variable and/or bonus rate. Or a fixed-term ISA/bond that comes to an end at some stage.

societys_child

I'll err on the side of caution . . .

Absolute Discharge

Next case please . . .

Linton

pqrdef wrote: »

"Not proven" would imply some doubt about the facts, but the facts are clear enough. Introductory rates were invented, and are still used, not only by Halifax, with the aim that money will be attracted by the headline rate and will then be left to fester at low rates.

In other words, it's a deliberate trap. So clearly they aren't going to put up a banner saying "trap". They're going to camouflage it as well as they can get away with. And camouflage is deception, and deception is the essence of fraud.

A point clearly lost on many posters is that if you deceive, it's not an excuse if you also tell the truth. So appealing to the small print cuts no ice.

The ethics of setting traps for unwary customers are debatable, but those who do it can't seriously expect to disclaim all responsibility on the grounds that some customers are wary enough to avoid the trap.

And if the banks choose to design their products on the basis that most of their customers are muppets, they can hardly complain if people don't like bankers.

You seem to be under the impression that the "correct" rate is say 3% and ISA savers are being short changed after the first year by only being given 0.5%.

Sorry, it's not the case. Interest rates are in the final analysis determined by international money markets. The current short term interest rate for £s is currently, oddly enough, around 0.5% which is also the current bank rate. Bearing in mind the banks costs in running the infrastructure to provide an ISA it seems pretty clear that the bonus offer is a loss leader, uneconomic in the long term. So look on the bonus as a bonus, not an automatic right.

Complaining about the removal of the bonus after a year is a bit like complaining that Tesco are deceiving their customers by not keeping the BOGOFs running permanently.

Hooloovoo

Linton wrote: »

Complaining about the removal of the bonus after a year is a bit like complaining that Tesco are deceiving their customers by not keeping the BOGOFs running permanently.

Excellent analogy :cool:

pqrdef

Hooloovoo wrote: »

No it's not. A trap means you don't know what you're walking in to.

And clearly many people didn't.

Hooloovoo wrote: »

I can't remember the last time I saw a bonus rate described in small print. It's clearly spelt out.

Things have changed. The banks have been taken to task by the regulators, and now they do as much as they think they have to do to keep the regulators happy.

All the same, it's still their deliberate objective to dangle the nice fat juicy worm and then stick people in the keepnet, where their money will earn a pathetic rate. No bank is actively chasing rate tarts - they're just the inevitable collateral damage.

The average interest paid on cash ISAs is 0.61%. That's the measure of how successful introductory niceness is. You may think the customers are stupid, but customers aren't under any obligation not to be stupid.

Whether stupid people should be fair game is a matter of opinion.

talexuser

pqrdef wrote: »

they can hardly complain if people don't like bankers.

I despise bankers, so that is all the more reason to be vigilant and make sure they don't reduce your rates when the time comes. Complaining that you did not pay attention to what is happening to your own money is hardly anyone else's fault.

AmIBeingRobbed

talexuser wrote: »

Not Guilty.
I had the same ISA and the terms were perfectly clear when I took it out. The day after the high interest was paid and the rate dropped it was transferred to another high interest (for 12 months) version.

I have nothing to do with the financial services industry.

How did you find out the interst was to be reduced to 0.5% per annum?

I don't recall agreeing to that rate or even seeing it anywhere.

AmIBeingRobbed

cos wrote: »

I have several Halifax accounts. Online, I can view them. Great. With one or two I can click 'see more account information' and the current interest rate appears. Easy, simple and transparent.

With fixed (from one to five years) rate savings, it doesn't appear.

Now, why would that be . . .

Not proven.

What's not proven ? You've accepted that Halifax does not make known interest rates on its products which is potentially fraudulent ... and even question why Halifax might do that. Well the answer is simple, its intention is to pay its customers a derisory interest rate. Now does it use some of that money to pay other customers a higher rate?

Is that why you bank with them?

Linton

cos wrote: »

I have several Halifax accounts. Online, I can view them. Great. With one or two I can click 'see more account information' and the current interest rate appears. Easy, simple and transparent.

With fixed (from one to five years) rate savings, it doesn't appear.

Now, why would that be . . .

I'm going for the slightly unusual Scottish verdict -

Not proven.

Err I dont see the issue here - fixed rates are fixed agreed at the time of setting up the account, so how can there been any deception?