Triodos Bank offering personal current accounts

innovate

dalesrider wrote: »

Its not Banks cover.... Its a Gov based scheme (for want of better description)

You do want a better description, really. The FSCS scheme was put in place as a result of legislation but that doesn't make it a "Government based scheme" (whatever one of those might be). It is the financial industry who funds the scheme, not the Government (even if the Government at times provided a loan to the FSCS).

The FSCS is the UK's statutory fund of last resort for customers of financial services firms. This means that FSCS can pay compensation to consumers if a financial services firm is unable, or likely to be unable, to pay claims against it. The FSCS is an independent body, set up under the Financial Services & Markets Act 2000 (FSMA).

Source: http://www.fscs.org.uk/what-we-cover/questions-and-answers/

dalesrider wrote: »

I would also say should one of the big banks ever go under, getting even that amount back is not going to be a quick and easy task.
Which is why bailing banks out is a cheaper option.

It is an outrage that there are still people working in banks nowadays who think Government won't have much choice but to rescue them if they fall on hard times. Hopefully we will never have to find out but I reckon it is an almost certainty that no further UK banks would be rescued with (non-existent) taxpayer money.

dalesrider

innovate wrote: »

It is an outrage that there are still people working in banks nowadays who think Government won't have much choice but to rescue them if they fall on hard times. Hopefully we will never have to find out but I reckon it is an almost certainty that no further UK banks would be rescued with (non-existent) taxpayer money.

I do not think that banks should be bailed out no matter what.

Just that a realistic view is that do we really want to see what would have happened if Lloyds and RBS had not been shored up by public funds. End of the day proper management of this will see a profit for the public purse.

The other option would have been to let them fail and see millions of people unable to access their money while the whole mess was sorted out.

Never mind the extra drain on the public purse by thousands starting to claim dole etc.

End of the day this was a political matter as a certain PM G Brown overuled other parties who said Lloyds should not be allowed to take over RBS. Which made matters far worse then they were.

Yes. Management of these should be out on their backside, just the same as anyother company that fails.
Thankfully most banks are well managed in the UK and never took any of the money they could have had.
So odds on we will never see one of the big banks fail. But would not be surprised if one of the smaller ones went belly up.

Someone has suggested that Cyprus is a test to see just what would happen if a large bank was allowed to fail.

Seems the public in Cyprus are already screaming....

Now is the time to ensure that everyone has at least 2 bank accounts with totally seperate bank groups. In case one fails. At least you have a failsafe to keep you living.

dr_adidas01

End of the day this was a political matter as a certain PM G Brown overuled other parties who said Lloyds should not be allowed to take over RBS. Which made matters far worse then they were.

Just a slight correction here Lloyds weren't going to buy RBS it was Santander that was going to buy RBS, but the deal fell through.

Lloyds actually bought HBOS (Halifax Bank Of Scotland). Just thought this should be corrected!! :rotfl:

innovate

dalesrider wrote: »

Someone has suggested that Cyprus is a test to see just what would happen if a large bank was allowed to fail.

That test has long been made, with a bank that would have fitted all the Cyprus banks into their back pocket. Lehman Brothers, 2008. It's been painful since, but we are still here. So is the rest of the world.