The Top Easy Access Savings Discussion Area

masonic

jaceyboy said:

soulsaver said:

Re Chips inclusion in ToTP:

My personal 'unconvinced' view of the Chip FSCS 100% cover, 100% of the time hasn't changed. 

I've just decided to include them in the list (for now) instead of getting embroiled in another discussion about their omission.

Please DYOR, form you own opinion - don't rely on the fact that they're included in the ToTP as any confirmation of contiguous FSCS protection... 

Hold on, am I covered with Chip or not?

Chip is not authorised to accept deposits, so it is breaking the law if it did so, but it doesn't. Any money it received would not be FSCS protected. Fortunately, its instant access saver is provided by Clearbank, which is fully FSCS protected, and money transferred by either Open Banking or Faster Payments goes directly to your savings account provided by ClearBank a Clearbank holding account, where it is ringfenced from Chip's own assets. It is automatically allocated to your FSCS protected Clearbank savings account using the reference provided during the transfer. The status of any money that was fraudulently taken from the holding account is what is in question (ie if Chip fails and there is also fraudulent activity).

Edit: struck out incorrect reference to a ClearBank holding account. This only applies to incoming debit card payments. The Chip Instant Access Saver is "opened in your name, and come[s] with your own individual sort-code and account number." https://www.getchip.uk/the-blog/how-we-protect-your-money

TiVo_Lad

You can also look at the situation from ClearBank's perspective:

https://clear.bank/use-cases/fintech

friolento

Eirambler said:

 It might maybe still be worth just putting a small caveat next to the chip link while keeping it on the main list - something like *not 100% FSCS protected, DYOR* or something to that effect.

That would be misleading because if you deposit with OB or Faster Payment, you get 100% FSCS protection. It's only deposits made by card, either directly or via a payment wallet, which are not protected until cleared.

dgpur

Virgin M Plus saver has made a laughably slow and poor increase from 3.03% to 3.55% (under £25,000, still 2.52% for balances above that).

Bridlington1

Halifax could be worth keeping an eye on in the future though. Their reward bonus saver has just risen to 4.2%, which is only 0.15% off being included in the top 10 if I'm not mistaken. 

BooJewels

Bridlington1 said:

Halifax could be worth keeping an eye on in the future though. Their reward bonus saver has just risen to 4.2%, which is only 0.15% off being included in the top 10 if I'm not mistaken. 

From memory that's a triple access account - which I decided against for that reason - so probably won't meet many people's 'easy access' criteria.

Eirambler

lcooper said:

Eirambler said:

 It might maybe still be worth just putting a small caveat next to the chip link while keeping it on the main list - something like *not 100% FSCS protected, DYOR* or something to that effect.

That would be misleading because if you deposit with OB or Faster Payment, you get 100% FSCS protection. It's only deposits made by card, either directly or via a payment wallet, which are not protected until cleared.

Surely then it would be misleading to say that it is 100% protected, if it's only protected when you deposit in certain ways? So I think my original suggestion holds true, it's not 100% FSCS protected like other accounts on the list and you should DYOR to see if it's for you or not. It's not for me anyway.

In Chip's own words: "Whilst your transactions are pending, your money is safeguarded, but not covered by FSCS."

That tells me all I need to know. And will probably be similar for anyone who saw what happened to people on this forum with Crown Currency Exchange some years ago.

Edit - I see soulsaver has added a note to the listing, I think that deals with the issue well. Like all the accounts it's for people take their own decisions after that.

phillw

Eirambler said:
In Chip's own words: "Whilst your transactions are pending, your money is safeguarded, but not covered by FSCS."

Wouldn't you chargeback the debit card if they went under while the transaction was pending?

flobbalobbalob

TiVo_Lad said:

You can also look at the situation from ClearBank's perspective:

https://clear.bank/use-cases/fintech

They've only got 5 clients !

masonic

Eirambler said:

lcooper said:

Eirambler said:

 It might maybe still be worth just putting a small caveat next to the chip link while keeping it on the main list - something like *not 100% FSCS protected, DYOR* or something to that effect.

That would be misleading because if you deposit with OB or Faster Payment, you get 100% FSCS protection. It's only deposits made by card, either directly or via a payment wallet, which are not protected until cleared.

Surely then it would be misleading to say that it is 100% protected, if it's only protected when you deposit in certain ways? So I think my original suggestion holds true, it's not 100% FSCS protected like other accounts on the list and you should DYOR to see if it's for you or not. It's not for me anyway.

In Chip's own words: "Whilst your transactions are pending, your money is safeguarded, but not covered by FSCS."

That tells me all I need to know. And will probably be similar for anyone who saw what happened to people on this forum with Crown Currency Exchange some years ago.

Edit - I see soulsaver has added a note to the listing, I think that deals with the issue well. Like all the accounts it's for people take their own decisions after that.

No savings account offers FSCS protection for money not in the account. While a debit card transaction is pending, the money has not been debited from your linked account.