Thinking of usingStae Bank of India or Bank of London & the Middle East

viking1

I am looking to tie money up for 5 years which is maturing from other accounts, as not convinced interest rates will rise much over next few years. The above 2 banks seem to be offering the best rates. I was going to use SBOI as their interest rate is compounded whereas the BOLAME is not. However on reading Martin's information on foreign banks although the staff at SBOI told me they are fully covered by The FSCE/FSA scheme up to £85k Martin says it would be up to the Indian Government whether or not they'd pay out to foreigners in a hurry (or at all?) BLME are fully covered by FSCS who would pay out anycompensation if bank fails. They are similar to ICICI with whom I have banked with before with no complaints so far.

Does anyone know if information on Martin's information is still up to date as SBOI have the FSCS logo on their site. Has anyone any knowledge of either bank's strength. or experience of either?

innovate

Not sure where on MSE you have seen that SBoI are not part of the FSCS protection scheme - - but with all due respect to MSE, if the bank's website states they are part of the scheme, they are.

If you are still in doubt, you can confirm it with the FSA.

Reaper

viking1 wrote: »

Martin says it would be up to the Indian Government whether or not they'd pay out to foreigners in a hurry (or at all?)

Like Innovate I can't see where Martin says that. Can you point us to the article?

BLME are fully covered by FSCS who would pay out anycompensation if bank fails. They are similar to ICICI with whom I have banked with before with no complaints so far.

No, they are not the same. BLME are a Sharia compliant bank which means they are not quoting you interest rates but target profit figures instead. While you stand an excellent chance of getting the figures quoted it is not guaranteed and that is probably why Martin excludes them.

alanq

I think that there may be an error in MSE advice - or have I misunderstood in some way?

"Search for non-EEA incorporation

All banks in the 'Banks incorporated in the United Kingdom' category are fully covered by the FSCS, while institutions listed under the catchy title of 'Banks incorporated outside the EEA authorised to accept deposits through a branch in the UK' only have their home compensation scheme, unless they are on the FSCS top up list."
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/safe-savings#foreign

Elsewhere the article states
"That's because banks from the European Economic Area are allowed to opt for a slightly different protection, called the 'passport' scheme, which means if they went bust, you'd have to claim money back from the bank's home country's compensation scheme. Banks from outside Europe can't do this, and therefore if they operate here have full UK compensation."

So shouldn't the MSE article read
""Search for EEA incorporation

All banks in the 'Banks incorporated in the United Kingdom' category are fully covered by the FSCS, while institutions listed under the catchy title of 'Banks incorporated in the EEA authorised to accept deposits through a branch in the UK' only have their home compensation scheme, unless they are on the FSCS top up list."

Sceptic001

Yes, alanq, you are right. This is what has caused confusion for the OP.

I would add to your amendment, for further clarification,

Search for EEA incorporation

All banks in the 'Banks incorporated in the United Kingdom' and 'Banks incorporated outside the EEA authorised to accept deposits through a branch in the UK' categories are fully covered by the FSCS, while institutions listed under the catchy title of 'Banks incorporated in the EEA authorised to accept deposits through a branch in the UK' only have their home compensation scheme, unless they are on the FSCS top up list.

Can someone at MSE Towers please make the correction? :T