📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Just how dangerous is it to go above the £50k FSCS limit for investments?

Just thinking that I've tried to have a diversified portfolio in terms of funds (though I'm mostly with Vanguard - who afaik have a very unique structure which protects you somewhat) but my entire ISA amount is with iWeb.

Would you guys generally recommend making sure to never go above £50k per financial institution? Thank you

Comments

  • I suppose it depends on the institution.

    The Government so far has propped up the big banks, but might not see the economic or political need for a smaller bank, unit trust etc.

    You're probably aware, but others might not be, that often different 'brands' are combined under one institution for FSCS protection purposes and the limit applies across the 'brands', not individually (eg Post Office and Bank of Ireland; or Birmingham Midshires, Halifax and Bank of Scotland).

    I think the limits are £85k for savings (reducing to £75k from 31 Dec) and £50k for investments?
    A kind word lasts a minute, a skelped erse is sair for a day.
  • Archi_Bald
    Archi_Bald Posts: 9,681 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    It's been discussed on the forum before - if I find the link to the thread I'll post it.

    In the meantime this is of interest: http://monevator.com/investor-compensation-scheme/
  • Glen_Clark
    Glen_Clark Posts: 4,397 Forumite
    edited 9 August 2015 at 6:57AM
    As I understand it, if the platform or fund had a shortfall because a Bernard Madoff in it had been trousering your money instead of buying shares with it, then any shortfall would be shared among all investors.
    But rather than the loss being shared on a percentage basis, each investor would lose the same sum irrespective of the amount they had in the fund - unless of course they had less than that sum. Since this should be less than the compensation limit, everyone would be reimbursed by the compensation scheme.
    The chances of their being nothing in the fund as there was with Madoff seem inconceivable - somebody would have spotted it before it got to that stage. Madoff only got away with it because he kept everything to himself, operating on a nod and a wink basis with his clients, insinuating they were profiting from his inside information so should keep it to themselves.
    “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” --Upton Sinclair
  • jimjames
    jimjames Posts: 18,755 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    I wouldn't call it dangerous at all. I have more with 1 provider.
    Remember the saying: if it looks too good to be true it almost certainly is.
  • Gaaraz
    Gaaraz Posts: 136 Forumite
    Thank you all very much for the responses - it seems like even if I'm not totally strict about keeping it to £50k per institution, it's probably sensible to not have everything in just the one place (i.e. iWeb) just in case something does go wrong :) Really appreciate your advice.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.4K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.8K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.4K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.1K Life & Family
  • 258K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.