The Top Easy Access Savings Discussion Area

BooJewels

I'd personally much rather have the inconvenience of dealing with the bank being over-cautious than lose the dosh.  I've only had to go through it once a month or so ago and it wasn't my money that time, it was an estate I was administering and I was distributing to one beneficiary after a house sale.  The amount was greater than my daily transfer limit, so I did it over a couple of days and the second one was snagged by the fraud team.  It was sorted in a phone call and they then released the payment - total inconvenience of about 20 minutes.  A little longer for my heart to slow down.  My heart would have really pounded if I'd lost the money.

guyvxt

Stargunner said:

CooperSF said:

Catch you later, Chip.

I will be sticking with them, as they are only around 0.1% behind the market leaders and their payments in and out are immediate and the monthly interest suits me.

Does anyone know when Chip usually update their interest rates to reflect the new BOE base rate changes? Same with Ford Money too please.

I realised last week that I had a load of money sat in my current account earning nothing so shifted it over to Ford Money and Chip after reading on here.

Section62

masonic said:

boingy said:

 

At the airport, you can expect to be asked if you packed your bag yourself, if anyone has given you anything to take in your luggage, and if anyone could have put anything in there without your knowledge. These questions, like with banking, are designed to pick up suspicious circumstances that could be indicative of them being an unknowing party to criminal activity. If they are talking to a criminal, then the criminal will have answers to such questions, but is less likely to be able to get through the other security checks and board the flight. The vast majority of travellers will just answer the questions in the negative, and you do have to wonder about those who would accept something to take through airport security for someone else, but perhaps some do realise what they are doing is dodgy at the 11th hour. In banking, there have been reports of people coming to their senses during questioning. 

The questioning also serves two other purposes -

1) How is the question answered... is there nervousness, doubt, irritation etc in the content and tone of the reply, which might indicate the person isn't telling the whole truth.

2) Incrimination... if you've answered specific questions (which are probably being recorded) then it is harder to subsequently change your story.  In the airport situation you can't deny knowledge of the $1M stashed in your suitcase if you've just confirmed you packed it yourself.  In the banking case the 'incrimination' is mainly in not being able to claim subsequently that the bank did nothing to stop you handing over your money to a fraudster, or in the case of someone (e.g. a family member) making unauthorised transactions this would be evidence that they misled the bank and answered untruthfully.

masonic

guyvxt said:

Stargunner said:

CooperSF said:

Catch you later, Chip.

I will be sticking with them, as they are only around 0.1% behind the market leaders and their payments in and out are immediate and the monthly interest suits me.

Does anyone know when Chip usually update their interest rates to reflect the new BOE base rate changes? Same with Ford Money too please.

I realised last week that I had a load of money sat in my current account earning nothing so shifted it over to Ford Money and Chip after reading on here.

Chip don't usually update their interest rates to reflect the new BoE base rate changes, even though Chip is unlike most savings providers in placing savers' money at the BoE via Clearbank. Their current rate looks to be in line with their usual margin vs the base rate.

Historically Chip has updated its rate when other savings providers have raised their rates above Chip's. Recently they have been unable to maintain the top spot and seem to be making less and less effort to maintain a high place in the rate tables. If you don't lend money out to borrowers at greater than the base rate, then you can't remain competitive as rates hiked more gradually, and ultimately level off or even decrease.

PixelPound

boingy said:

Zopa_Trooper said:

If I have someone listed on my trusted payments, other people that I've sent money to before and especially other banks with accounts in my name, I see no reason whatsoever for any blockages. Fine the first time but not on subsequent occasions. Also, once you read the warnings and you press the "Happy to go ahead with this transaction", it should be then your responsibility, not the banks.

That's definitely how it should be, but it's not how it is. I've had a £100 transfer held up for checks, to an account in my name that I have transferred to many time previously. The most ridiculous thing is the interrogation you have to suffer to unblock it. All the questions they ask are just as easy for a scammer to answer as they are for me.

If it was something like £100 held up, you could answer, politely:

"What's the amount?"

Well, if you don't know, then how do I know I'm talking to my real bank?

"Why are you making the transfer?"

Because the savings rates you have are insulting. Do you not know what the BoE base rate is? Have you not read what the FCA have said about unfairly low savings rates.

"Is anyone making you do this?"

Yes, you. You, the bank, are making me call up and go through a set of ridiculous questions just because I want to move my money to somewhere the savings rate isn't an insult.

Bridlington1

Section62 said:

masonic said:

boingy said:

 

At the airport, you can expect to be asked if you packed your bag yourself, if anyone has given you anything to take in your luggage, and if anyone could have put anything in there without your knowledge. These questions, like with banking, are designed to pick up suspicious circumstances that could be indicative of them being an unknowing party to criminal activity. If they are talking to a criminal, then the criminal will have answers to such questions, but is less likely to be able to get through the other security checks and board the flight. The vast majority of travellers will just answer the questions in the negative, and you do have to wonder about those who would accept something to take through airport security for someone else, but perhaps some do realise what they are doing is dodgy at the 11th hour. In banking, there have been reports of people coming to their senses during questioning. 

The questioning also serves two other purposes -

1) How is the question answered... is there nervousness, doubt, irritation etc in the content and tone of the reply, which might indicate the person isn't telling the whole truth.

2) Incrimination... if you've answered specific questions (which are probably being recorded) then it is harder to subsequently change your story.  In the airport situation you can't deny knowledge of the $1M stashed in your suitcase if you've just confirmed you packed it yourself.  In the banking case the 'incrimination' is mainly in not being able to claim subsequently that the bank did nothing to stop you handing over your money to a fraudster, or in the case of someone (e.g. a family member) making unauthorised transactions this would be evidence that they misled the bank and answered untruthfully.

If it's of any value, when I had a Halifax payment blocked in June 2022 I had to ring them to get the payment unblocked. I submitted a DSAR into Halifax earlier this year when LBG decided to close all my accounts and I found this detailing the phone call:

Wheres_My_Cashback

The problem with the banks is that their systems have been set up to be more meticulous in querying transactions, not for the benefit of the customer, but for primarily their own protection because ultimately they become liable in most cases.
This leads to far more transactions being blocked, yet the banks have not updated their infrastructure to deal with the extra demands on their systems, nor have they put enough staff in place to deal with customers trying to move the blocked payments, therefore resulting in very long wait times to resolve the matters.
It is not uncommon for customers to wait in excess of 60 minutes when trying to clear these payments or wait up to 8 hours for them to be approved automatically. This can lead to wholly avoidable extra costs/losses for the customer.

masonic

nic_c said:

boingy said:

Zopa_Trooper said:

If I have someone listed on my trusted payments, other people that I've sent money to before and especially other banks with accounts in my name, I see no reason whatsoever for any blockages. Fine the first time but not on subsequent occasions. Also, once you read the warnings and you press the "Happy to go ahead with this transaction", it should be then your responsibility, not the banks.

That's definitely how it should be, but it's not how it is. I've had a £100 transfer held up for checks, to an account in my name that I have transferred to many time previously. The most ridiculous thing is the interrogation you have to suffer to unblock it. All the questions they ask are just as easy for a scammer to answer as they are for me.

If it was something like £100 held up, you could answer, politely:

"What's the amount?"

Well, if you don't know, then how do I know I'm talking to my real bank?

"Why are you making the transfer?"

Because the savings rates you have are insulting. Do you not know what the BoE base rate is? Have you not read what the FCA have said about unfairly low savings rates.

"Is anyone making you do this?"

Yes, you. You, the bank, are making me call up and go through a set of ridiculous questions just because I want to move my money to somewhere the savings rate isn't an insult.

Yes you could do that, and venting at someone might even make you feel better, but it won't get your money to its destination any faster. The person on the receiving end of your behaviour will just be trying to do their job, which they will have no discretion over.

phillw

Wheres_My_Cashback said:

The problem with the banks is that their systems have been set up to be more meticulous in querying transactions, not for the benefit of the customer, but for primarily their own protection because ultimately they become liable in most cases.

They became liable for the benefit of the customer. What do you expect them to do? Be held responsible for your actions, while also just letting you YOLO any transaction you wish?

jaceyboy

Alicon88 said:

Does anyone have experience with Monument?
I would like to give it a try but would be nice to have some opinions first 

Thinking of doing a fix with them for 6 months, seems pretty good at 5.50%