FSCS cash limit coming down to £75K / new £1m temp protection

polymaff

jimjames wrote: »

If the number affected by the £85k limit is 5%, then the number affected by multiples of that limit must be far far smaller. As couple can get £150k now then the numbers are even smaller.

Your point being, Jim?

masonic

polymaff wrote: »

You are assuming that the retail depositors the FSCS refer to only have one £85k or more deposit. A false assumption.

The actual statement from the FSCS is that "The new limit will mean that more than 95% of retail depositors will be fully protected". I'm sure the "more than" more than makes up for the tiny minority of individuals who hold more than £150k in long term cash deposits split between two (and only two) banking groups. IMHO, anyone in that situation is in desperate need of good financial advice.

Again, faulty logic. 5% of the depositors in all FSCS members could easily overload the relatively small fraction that are challenger banks. Challenger banks such as Vanquis, UBL etc. have a viable business model - but it cannot absorb shock deposits.

Not at all. The vast majority of the money will stay with in the big banks as you well know. Perhaps 1-2% would feed in to the challenger banks if they were lucky. Atom bank alone is targeting a 5% market share by 2020, unless the others are planning on little to no growth I really don't see this being a problem.

In any case, you seem to be under the impression that these challenger banks do not possess powers to set their own interest rates and/or close issues of accounts in order to control inflows. The should all welcome any market conditions that allow them to grow their customer base with little effort.

colsten

polymaff wrote: »

Colsten. Neither my post, or the quote it included, has anything to do with your post.

my response is in direct response to yours, in the context of the quted text

polymaff wrote: »

That said - I believe that we would agree that the answer to your ejaculation is NO.

you got me with this one as I have no idea what you are on about. So I am afraid, I can't agree here.

polymaff

Look, I've got three little puppy dogs, enjoying running around and around my heels and barking like mad.

If you want to comment on what I say - either as a free-standing post or as a response to a included quote - OK. Otherwise, just make your points, on your own behalf, please

masonic

polymaff wrote: »

Look, I've got three little puppy dogs, enjoying running around and around my heels and barking like mad.

If you want to comment on what I say - either as a free-standing post or as a response to a included quote - OK. Otherwise, just make your points, on your own behalf, please

You are under no obligation to engage with anyone you don't want to on here. I'm sure none of us will be offended that you are ignoring us...

But in all seriousness, who wouldn't want to play with three little puppy dogs?

dunstonh

Sort of defeats the purpose of a discussion board if there isnt any discussion.

TheTracker

For what it's worth, the 85k limit when brought in was said by FSCS to encompass 98% of savers. So a reduction to 75k, while effecting the amount of compensation available to the remaining 5% who hold more than 75k now, probably effects significantly less if you're only looking at those with amounts between 75 and 85k. And those with this amount are probably the ones diligently managing against that limit so the effect on them is about 30 minutes work to open another account or two. Big whoop.

masonic

TheTracker wrote: »

For what it's worth, the 85k limit when brought in was said by FSCS to encompass 98% of savers. So a reduction to 75k, while effecting the amount of compensation available to the remaining 5% who hold more than 75k now, probably effects significantly less if you're only looking at those with amounts between 75 and 85k. And those with this amount are probably the ones diligently managing against that limit so the effect on them is about 30 minutes work to open another account or two. Big whoop.

Well, quite. And for those who can't be bothered to open multiple accounts and have >£85k, their compensation will remain unlimited at NS&I.

colsten

masonic wrote: »

Well, quite. And for those who can't be bothered to open multiple accounts and have >£85k, their compensation will remain unlimited at NS&I.

It's a bit of a PITA for those with 4 maxed Santander 123s

But it isn't a life-changing event. And who knows, perhaps some more banks will offer high-interest current accounts come January.

polymaff

masonic wrote: »

Well, quite. And for those who can't be bothered to open multiple accounts and have >£85k, their compensation will remain unlimited at NS&I.

Agreed, and a single new £75k investment will hold the overflow from at least 7 £85k accounts.

With respect to NS&I, I'd feel happier if they put an asterisk against their "100% safe" claim together with some weasel-words - a bit like for RPI, where they actually mean the meaningless "the Retail Price Index ... or any Index replacing it".