Top Cash NISAs 2014/15

Archi_Bald

It's very fashionable with many people not to read T&Cs, as people are too busy, T&Cs are too complicated, people are in a rush, apparently "nobody is reading T&Cs anyway", people couldn't find the T&Cs, or any other excuse you wish to list. When something then doesn't go according to expectations, it is the bank's fault as all banks are evil, allegedly.

minislim

considering the government has done all it can to try and encourage us to save more with improved ISA allowances.

The banks do not seem to be playing ball (no surprise really).

cash ISA rates are rubbish with even the best ones down at around 1.5%

but its the fixed rate market that is really annoying me at the moment.

a few years ago you took a gamble on the fixed rate account to get a slightly better rate and just in case the rates dropped. (which they haven't for years).

most of these accounts where fixed rates and had penalties if you left early (which is understandable).

but now i keep seeing another bit of small print that has only just appeared. this is limited paying in time.

i've had fixed rate ISA's in the past which have allowed further payments in. i haven't got a large amount to just lump into an account, but i'd like to pay a bit in each month.

most if not all fixed rate ISA's do not allow you to do this?

so they're not really a savings account then are they? they're more like an investment account?

as usual the banks dictate way too much and its about time they started working for their customers and not themselves!

Archi_Bald

minislim wrote: »

but now i keep seeing another bit of small print that has only just appeared. this is limited paying in time.

i've had fixed rate ISA's in the past which have allowed further payments in.

Limited paying-in times on fixed rate / fixed term accounts are nothing unusual. It is highly unusual to find a fixed rate/term cash ISA that allows regular payments. For a long time, Lloyds were the only provider offering it.

But it is a bit academic anyway as if you want to make regular savings, you do a lot better in regular savings and/or current accounts. If you want to use your ISA allowance, you can still tip the money into a cash ISA before the new tax year starts.

If you need your savings in the next 3-5 years, there is very little if not no point in a cash ISA. If you have more than 5 years, you are most likely to get a lot better deal in an investment ISA. Bottom line is that for very many people, a cash ISA makes little to no sense these days.

thenudeone

colsten wrote: »

You cannot split your annual allowance across two or more cash ISAs.

Not 100% true.

It would be more accurate to say:
You cannot split your annual allowance across two or more cash ISA providers.

At least two providers (Nationwide BS and Newcastle BS) allow you to split your annual allowance between two or more of their ISA accounts, but this is the exception rather than the rule.

colsten

You are right, but I wanted to keep things simple for the person asking "Is it allowed to split the NISA into different banks?"

Morevover, I also don't see, at present interest rates, any good reason for divvying up your ISA allowance between the various Nationwide or the various Newcastle ISAs. If you want to put some money away for longer, and some for just a year or two, by all means put the longer term money into a fixed term cash ISA. But it would be a bad move to put the short term money into a cash ISA, for the reasons that have been discussed here dozens and dozens of times, i.e. you get more interest elsewhere.

But yes, my answer was not 100% technically correct.

GingerFurball_2

minislim wrote: »

considering the government has done all it can to try and encourage us to save more with improved ISA allowances.

The banks do not seem to be playing ball (no surprise really).

cash ISA rates are rubbish with even the best ones down at around 1.5%

but its the fixed rate market that is really annoying me at the moment.

a few years ago you took a gamble on the fixed rate account to get a slightly better rate and just in case the rates dropped. (which they haven't for years).

most of these accounts where fixed rates and had penalties if you left early (which is understandable).

but now i keep seeing another bit of small print that has only just appeared. this is limited paying in time.

i've had fixed rate ISA's in the past which have allowed further payments in. i haven't got a large amount to just lump into an account, but i'd like to pay a bit in each month.

most if not all fixed rate ISA's do not allow you to do this?

so they're not really a savings account then are they? they're more like an investment account?

as usual the banks dictate way too much and its about time they started working for their customers and not themselves!

1.5% is pretty generous considering the base rate.

thor

minislim wrote: »

considering the government has done all it can to try and encourage us to save more with improved ISA allowances.

Are you sure about that? Increasing the boe rate from it's all time low may have been an avenue it could have explored. It would have meant that ministers would have had to pay more for the multiple mortgages they had acquired whilst building up their property empires though so the 'independent' Bank of England would never be allowed to do so.
Their excuse? The economy could not handle an increase! Is this the same economy that Gideon has been crowing about for the past year or so?

Robin_Davies

Martin, the Taxman doesn't take a slice from the cake. He takes a teaspoonful from the dollop of cream (interest) that is put on the cake each year. With an ordinary savings account, you lose the spoonful. With a cash NISA, you can eat (spend) all the cream. Or leave (reinvest) it all on the cake and next year more cream will be put on top (compounding). From yummy to yucky in a few short tax-free steps. Either way you keep the cake, but its nutritional value (buying power) reduces with inflation.

There must be a less nauseous analogy than this ...

jimjames

Robin_Davies wrote: »

Martin, the Taxman doesn't take a slice from the cake. He takes a teaspoonful from the dollop of cream (interest) that is put on the cake each year. With an ordinary savings account, you lose the spoonful. With a cash NISA, you can eat (spend) all the cream. Or leave (reinvest) it all on the cake and next year more cream will be put on top (compounding). From yummy to yucky in a few short tax-free steps. Either way you keep the cake, but its nutritional value (buying power) reduces with inflation.

There must be a less nauseous analogy than this ...

And the ISA cake gets a tiny dollop of cream and the non ISA cake (5% current accounts) gets a whole tub of cream! ISAs are not the best option for most people at the moment.

jimjames

GingerFurball wrote: »

1.5% is pretty generous considering the base rate.

Absolutely. Paying a rate of 1% ABOVE base rate is way, way more than ISAs were paying in 2007 before the financial crisis. Back then it was an amount below base rate so not as bad as some might suggest especially when you can achieve 10x the base rate if you put your savings in the right place. That was certainly not possible back in 2007.