MSE News: Warning! Re-Give savings not protected

Former_MSE_Dan

A new savings account provider offering high interest is NOT protected by any compensation scheme, which means if it went bust savers would be likely to lose their cash.

Read the full story:
Warning! Re-Give savings not protected by compensation scheme

AND

Despite the UK banks’ regulator, the Financial Services Authority (FSA), being aware of the problems for over 10 days, nothing has been done. While in the past this would seem a tiny window, in the age of the internet every second wasted could add to the amount of savers’ cash being put at grave risk.

Read the full BLOG:
FSA must act fast to stop savers unwittingly risking cash

dunstonh

Re-Give admits on its website that it is not FSCS-protected yet bizarrely adds that "your investment is not at risk".

If an IFA used the same statement on their report then it would be considered a mis-sale. It is a capital at risk product.

A Re-Give spokesperson says: "The fact that we are not under the FSCS does not mean that investments are at greater operational risk.

"On the contrary, because we are not under the FSCS - it means that we are exceptionally careful, extra vigilant and especially prudent when looking after the funds under our management."

Bizarre statement. Do they think that other companies that have gone on to fail leaving a shortfall to consumers actually planned to do so? (only scam companies do that). Intention maybe one thing but reality is another and reality is that it is not risk free and should not present itself as such.

MoneySaverLog

Worth considering if there is FSCS protection. Without it, it's avoid like the plague.

ctdctd

Glad to see other agree with my initial misgivings posted in the original discussion thread.
As I said - Buyer Beware!

london2008

The address they use on their website is 3 Perry Hill, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 7RD

Here is a Google Street View of 3 Perry Hill.
http://goo.gl/maps/T31P

I would not trust this company with a penny of mine!

Reaper

The fact that we are not under the FSCS does not mean that investments are at greater operational risk

A quite staggering statement. Blatantly untrue.

Paul_Herring

london2008 wrote: »

The address they use on their website is 3 Perry Hill, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 7RD

Here is a Google Street View of 3 Perry Hill.
http://goo.gl/maps/T31P

Nice living room though:

ctdctd

Paul_Herring wrote: »

Nice living room though:

It's a bit common.

You can also see it
here: http://www.evolvingenergysolutions.com/aboutus/
and here: http://www.annzoseo.com/seo/about-us.html
and here: http://www.platinum-vision.com/About-us.html

:cool:

jamesd

If you wish to complain to the Financial Services Authority about what may be a misleading financial promotion by a regulated company you should visit this page and then complete the reporting form. Don't call, they will after a long call just end up directing you to the reporting form. Items that you may wish to consider include:

http://www.regive.org.uk/savings-bond/5afsb.html Frequently Asked Questions section contains these claims, each of which you might consider to be false and/or misleading:

"Isn't my money at greater risk if it is not covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS)?" which compares investing with regive to investing with a firm covered by the FSCS and makes the claim that there is "No additional risk" compared to the FSCS protected firm. Since the FSCS protects against insolvency it seems very hard for this to be a true statement.

"Are you covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS)? No – but this does not mean that your investment is at risk". Later it says that "Is the return of my money guaranteed? ... No - we are FSA registered so the risk is relatively low and the return of the principal of your investment is principally assured, but it is not guaranteed". The first claim appears to be hard to be not misleading since the capital is later described as being at risk and FSA regulation says nothing about the level of risk of an investment.

In the terms and conditions at http://www.regive.org.uk/user/TC-5AFSB-V.3F5.pdf is the statement "in the unlikely event that it seems possible that we would not be able to maintain the value of the principal of your investment, then we may undertake to meet the required shortfall from our capital base. If for some reason we are not able to do this, we will contact you to ask if you wish to terminate the agreement". "Not able" implies a lack of discretion, inability, not a choice. "may undertake" implies a choice. The ambiguity means that this is not a clear statement - will the reimbursement happen if the capital is available by any lawful means or is there some discretion available to Regive?

dunstonh

ctdctd wrote: »

It's a bit common.

You can also see it
here: http://www.evolvingenergysolutions.com/aboutus/
and here: http://www.annzoseo.com/seo/about-us.html
and here: http://www.platinum-vision.com/About-us.html

:cool:

Got to love that. 10/10 for observation.

Anyone posting odds on their website being changed in the future to remove the image?

pooch

london2008 wrote: »

The address they use on their website is 3 Perry Hill, Chelmsford, Essex, CM1 7RD

Here is a Google Street View of 3 Perry Hill.
http://goo.gl/maps/T31P

I would not trust this company with a penny of mine!

Odd that the phone number they use (01273 741483) is a Brighton number, not a Chelmsford number.