RCI Bank 1.1% on entire account balance

antrobus

colsten wrote: »

You clearly have never claimed anything from a foreign compensation scheme, and probably not even from the FSCS either. I have. Which is why I warn people of the risks....

I have never claimed anything from any compensation scheme. That might be because I pay attention to that sort of thing.

colsten wrote: »

..In addition, nobody has a clue what Brexit brings to the party. Worst case, we are crashing out in a disorderly manner and God only knows what this would mean for the banking world. Even an orderly exit will have unknown implications on the passporting rights of banks....

It's really not that hard. RCI Bank can operate in the UK under the EU passporting scheme. Either (a) an agreement will be reached for the continuation of passporting post-Brexit, or (b) RCI Bank will get a UK banking licence, or (c) it will cease taking deposits in the UK and repay everybody.

I can only assume that you don't know much about banking regulation.

colsten wrote: »

....It is quite irresponsible of people to suggest putting your money into an EU27 bank carries the same risk as putting it into accounts that come with FSCS protection.

I think you are being rather silly myself. Renault isn't going bust, and neither is France.

EachPenny

But isn't the comparison between different protection arrangements moot in the context of this thread. The OP is asking why an account which pays 1.1% on the whole account balance is not regarded as a 'winner'.

Any balance in the account over approx £85k is not protected wherever the bank is based in the EU? So someone depositing an amount over £85k with one FI is doing it at a theoretical risk of capital loss.

An amount under £85k can be distributed around various accounts earning significantly more than 1.1% - anyone placing such a large amount of cash in one lower interest account is losing money. It is not a 'winning' strategy.

The difference in interest rate between the OP's suggestion and a UK based building society is 0.05%, somewhat marginal.

So the answer to the OP is it isn't a 'winner' because a strategy that results in you placing significant funds in the account is not going to be beneficial overall in comparison to other options. The marginal gain on this account compared to a UK based one has to be balanced against possible risk of non-FSCS protection.

If you have very large amounts of cash sitting around where the marginal gain becomes important, and you can bear the risk of capital loss, then you probably aren't reading this forum, and probably have access to other saving/investment opportunities which are far more attractive.;)

mgdavid

antrobus wrote: »

.........
I think you are being rather silly myself. Renault isn't going bust, and neither is France.

If France was a company they would've been trading while insolvent for donkey's years. And it's widely thought that Renault only stays afloat with back-door subsidies.
If France was doing so well they'd be a major contributor to the EU. They aren't.

System

mgdavid wrote: »

If France was a company they would've been trading while insolvent for donkey's years. And it's widely thought that Renault only stays afloat with back-door subsidies.
If France was doing so well they'd be a major contributor to the EU. They aren't.

France does very well from CAP and this makes their net contribution lower than the UK.

mailmannz

mgdavid wrote: »

If France was a company they would've been trading while insolvent for donkey's years. And it's widely thought that Renault only stays afloat with back-door subsidies.
If France was doing so well they'd be a major contributor to the EU. They aren't.

To be fair, pretty much if ANY European country was trading as a company they would have been put out of business decades ago.

Regards

Mailman

System

mailmannz wrote: »

To be fair, pretty much if ANY European country was trading as a company they would have been put out of business decades ago.

Regards

Mailman

I would extend that to most countries on the planet...

le_loup

Heng_Leng wrote: »

I would extend that to most countries on the planet...

That's why it's stupid to compare countries with companies ... and the ridiculous Thatcherite comparison with countries and households!