Hard-boiled Egg

Calchas

oldfella wrote: »

Your sequence is wrong - the run stopped when the govt guaranteed the savings

Apologies for moving away from the subject matter but Mervyn King (in his interview with the appropriate members of parliament) repeatedly stated that the people who queued at their branches did not do so illogically.

No matter what has been said on this site and how many times it has been said, the Governor of the Bank of England made it clear that those people behaved in a logical manner.

dolce_vita

What no-one has mentioned is the fact that Egg are owned by one of the largest banks in the world (citibank).

If they get to the stage that they can't honour their obligations then we really will be in trouble.

chris1

YorkshireBoy wrote: »

Be careful where you put it, because YBS have had such a clause for sometime now (although they don't specify a duration) - and other providers are bound to follow.

IceSave also have 60 days and at least the following have a clause of unspecified duration: Yorkshire, Coventry, ING, Sainsburys, Britannia, Birmingham Midshires, West Brom, Scarborough, Stroud, Chelsea, Cheshire, Derbyshire, Norwich & Peterborough...
:eek:

Geoffo_M

chris1 wrote: »

IceSave also have 60 days and at least the following have a clause of unspecified duration: Yorkshire, Coventry, ING, Sainsburys, Britannia, Birmingham Midshires, West Brom, Scarborough, Stroud, Chelsea, Cheshire, Derbyshire, Norwich & Peterborough...
:eek:

I wonder what would have happened had Northern Rock been in your list. There would have been rioting in the streets!

oldfella

What no-one has mentioned is the fact that Egg are owned by one of the largest banks in the world (citibank).

If they get to the stage that they can't honour their obligations then we really will be in trouble.

---

so why do they need such a daft clause ?

rathernot

oldfella wrote: »

What no-one has mentioned is the fact that Egg are owned by one of the largest banks in the world (citibank).

If they get to the stage that they can't honour their obligations then we really will be in trouble.

---

so why do they need such a daft clause ?

Presumably for the same reasons that, however irrationally, lots of people are now moving money around from what they feel are "unsafe" institutions to "safer" ones i.e. it may be a bloody big "what if" but it covers them better than not having the clause at all.

chris1

Geoffo_M wrote: »

I wonder what would have happened had Northern Rock been in your list. There would have been rioting in the streets!

Sounds strange, but it was probably good that it was Northern Rock, i.e. a bank with lots of branches for those media shots... Had it been internet only maybe no-one would have noticed...

Xbigman

dolce_vita wrote: »

What no-one has mentioned is the fact that Egg are owned by one of the largest banks in the world (citibank).

If they get to the stage that they can't honour their obligations then we really will be in trouble.

So if citibank in the US were in trouble could they restrict access to british accounts in their subsidiary companies? Makes you wonder, doesn't it?
Regards


X