The Top Easy Access Savings Discussion Area

phillw

4justice2 said:

I've still got my Marcus bonus till September next year, though only a small amount still in there as better rates elsewhere. With the suspension of the bonus and new accounts at only 2.25%, presume they have all the funds they need, and don't want to attract more.

It may be based on a prediction over the next 12 months. So they might be borrowing from elsewhere on different terms and just not wanting to commit to the bonus right now.

Wheres_My_Cashback

Earl Shilton have now knocked/equalled* Al Rayan at the top with a 2.85% Progress account though it's quite restrictive and mail/branch only.

*AR 2.81% / 2.85% AER (not quoted)

Band7

patpalloon said:

I've had several instant access savings accounts in recent years so I thought I would rate them. All FSCS backed. I've picked them on best interest rates that pay monthly, easy access preferably app, and rapid transfer of funds to/from your linked account. The best ones are Atom, Tandem, Marcus, Investec (no app). Chase is also pretty good but interest rates not as competitive now - but linked current account is good as 1% cashback on all purchases.

Ones I don't like because of slow transfers, long winded log in, sometimes only annual interest - Shawbrook, YBS, Sainsbury, Ford Money. Probably some others I have forgotten about but since closed.

What are other people's recommendations?

It much depends what you like and what's important to you. My main criteria for me are top rate, ease of use, and sometimes also a unique benefit. Nearly all of the ones you mention would fall into that category. I also love YBS for their unlimited DDs account (no longer on sale), Al Rayan for their consistently high rates, and a whole bunch of others when they have top rates - Santander, Virgin Money, Charter, Barclays, HSBC, Cambridge BS, Principality, Paragon, Gatehouse, Lloyds/Halifax/BoS, OakNorth, RBS/Natwest, Saffron and Zopa.

As an aside, you don't get Chase 1% cashback on all purchases. They have a very long list of exclusions..

Band7

Wheres_My_Cashback said:

Earl Shilton have now knocked/equalled* Al Rayan at the top with a 2.85% Progress account though it's quite restrictive and mail/branch only.

*AR 2.81% / 2.85% AER (not quoted)

They are not really in the same league because of the restrictions on Earl Shilton

soulsaver

Wheres_My_Cashback said:

Earl Shilton have now knocked/equalled* Al Rayan at the top with a 2.85% Progress account though it's quite restrictive and mail/branch only.

*AR 2.81% / 2.85% AER (not quoted)

Useful info. thanks, but won't be included in the ToTP ... and they're gonna need chat.

Why? Not Easy enough Access:
Postal/ Branch/phone application.
Passbook based accounts.
Can't be managed online.
ALL electronic w/d transfers incur a charge £30 same day, £10 next day and require passbook to be present in post/branch.
W/d by chq is free but still requires passbook.

Great if you live nearby.

I would add they can also beat the Progress account posted with their Heritage account which pays 3.00% to aged over 50s as above restrictions (and limited to 4 w/ds pa).

patpalloon

Malchester said:

It depends what you want out of the account and what your priorities are - level of interest, ease of access, app or not, speed of changing interest rate, speed of transfers etc., etc. An account that would be top of the list for some would not be for others. For instance, I am not keen on app only accounts but have a Zopa account which will be closed in December when a pot matures. 

True. App has to be decent like atom or tandem. I like having both online and app like Marcus. I found zopa was dreadful - opened and then closed the account promptly .

EssexHebridean

AndyTh_2 said:

Minty33 said:

Looks like Marcus has removed it's bonus to new customers  down to 2.25%

That also means existing customers can't renew their bonus as well. It was once useful at a time to keep renewing it to delay the drop

Like many others, I've made a point of renewing the bonuses each time I log in. I'm quite glad I logged in last a few days ago now! It the bonuses reappear then great, if not at least I have them until early November 2023! 

[Deleted User]

Band7 said:

patpalloon said:

I've had several instant access savings accounts in recent years so I thought I would rate them. All FSCS backed. I've picked them on best interest rates that pay monthly, easy access preferably app, and rapid transfer of funds to/from your linked account. The best ones are Atom, Tandem, Marcus, Investec (no app). Chase is also pretty good but interest rates not as competitive now - but linked current account is good as 1% cashback on all purchases.

Ones I don't like because of slow transfers, long winded log in, sometimes only annual interest - Shawbrook, YBS, Sainsbury, Ford Money. Probably some others I have forgotten about but since closed.

What are other people's recommendations?

As an aside, you don't get Chase 1% cashback on all purchases. They have a very long list of exclusions..

I'm sure you're right but the only purchase I didn't get money back on was a car. CHASE is accepted in more places than AMEX. I've had over £482 back so far which I think is a lot AND I am about to pay a world the round trip so another £170 on its way. Not to be sniffed at. I've also managed to squirrel away £142 into the 5% round-up account. Not much I grant you, I don't make a lot of little purchases but again better than a kick up the backside.

Band7

Deleted_User said:

Band7 said:

patpalloon said:

I've had several instant access savings accounts in recent years so I thought I would rate them. All FSCS backed. I've picked them on best interest rates that pay monthly, easy access preferably app, and rapid transfer of funds to/from your linked account. The best ones are Atom, Tandem, Marcus, Investec (no app). Chase is also pretty good but interest rates not as competitive now - but linked current account is good as 1% cashback on all purchases.

Ones I don't like because of slow transfers, long winded log in, sometimes only annual interest - Shawbrook, YBS, Sainsbury, Ford Money. Probably some others I have forgotten about but since closed.

What are other people's recommendations?

As an aside, you don't get Chase 1% cashback on all purchases. They have a very long list of exclusions..

I'm sure you're right but the only purchase I didn't get money back on was a car. CHASE is accepted in more places than AMEX. I've had over £482 back so far which I think is a lot AND I am about to pay a world the round trip so another £170 on its way. Not to be sniffed at. I've also managed to squirrel away £142 into the 5% round-up account. Not much I grant you, I don't make a lot of little purchases but again better than a kick up the backside.

I am not complaining about the Chase cashback - my cashback currently stands at a similar amount as yours, and I am one of the lucky ones who had their cashback period extended by several months. The issue is the claim that you get cashback on all purchases, which is far from what actually happens, and unsuspecting people might get misled. As I said, the list of exclusions is long. I won't comment on the round-up and the 5% interest on it.......

I hope we can now get back to the subject of this thread, top easy access savings 

cricidmuslibale

callum9999 said:

cricidmuslibale said:

callum9999 said:

cricidmuslibale said:

MiserlyMartin said:

callum9999 said:

MiserlyMartin said:

callum9999 said:

MiserlyMartin said:

So here we go again. Who will be the first out of the blocks to raise their accounts by the full 0.75%. I suspect most will wait 3-4 weeks before doing anything. Let's face it, we are now only getting the rises 2 months after last rise to be properly passed on. Al Ryan is now at 2.81%  - Just doing a small increase before they are forced to do more after the big boys raise later.

These Banks and BS really are taking UK savers for mugs

No, a disturbingly high number of UK savers just don't understand how banks and the BOE rate works.

If a bank already has enough deposits to cover their needs then they'd be pretty stupid to voluntarily decide to pay more than they need to to borrow it from you. There's absolutely no rational reason whatsoever for savings accounts to increase their rates by 0.75% simply because the BOE rate increased by 0.75%.

What, like there is no rational reason for them to put mortgage rates up immediately?

Phillw answers this perfectly by pointing out that's exactly how tracker mortgages work, but even if they didn't, in what way is it irrational for them to increase their profit margins? Is the idea that banks try to make profit new to you?

Of course they need to raise mortgage rates immediately, by the same reason they should put savings rates up immediately, they cannot have their cake and eat it. But it sounds as though a few on here actually like being screwed savers by banks!

I think a fair and reasonable situation would be for the interest rates on like for like mortgage and savings accounts to rise and fall simultaneously; i.e. interest rates on standard variable mortgages would go up and down at exactly the same time as interest rates on easy access savings accounts, fixed rate mortgage interest rates would go up or down at the same time as fixed rate savings accounts interest rates, tracker mortgage interest rates rise and fall alongside tracker savings interest rates.

Unfortunately this is far from what tends to happen with quite a lot of savings & mortgage providers. Also tracker savings accounts are far less common than tracker mortgages, as far as I’m aware.

So I can understand to a certain extent MiserlyMartin’s exasperation with many (although not all by any means) banks and building societies.

So if a bank has £1bn in mortgage lending and £2bn in deposits, you think it's remotely rational for them to increase their revenue by 0.25% yet increase their costs by 0.5%. They can easily avoid doing this by increasing the interest rates on their mortgages by twice as much as their simultaneous interest rate increase on their savings accounts.

If a bank has more money in savings accounts than they're willing to lend out, you think they should pay extra interest to everyone despite not even needing the money in the first place? No, of course I don’t! I’m not that naïve! Where did I even suggest that in the first place?!

If you understood the reasons why banks offer savings accounts, and how they decide the interest rates, it would be very obvious why there aren't many trackers. That comment sounds very condescending and, frankly, rather rude! Of course I understand why banks offer savings accounts and how interest rates are decided! It is perfectly business friendly to offer a tracker savings account to complement a tracker mortgage account; clearly the mortgage account in this case would be designed to bring in more money in interest in this case and the savings account would be designed to bring in less money in interest!

Please see bold replies above.

1. No they can't... They don't just decide what the mortgage rates will be, it's contracted. It's also utterly ridiculous to double the interest on their mortgages to compensate for large savings deposits. Their mortgages will become uncompetitive, people will leave and now their savings excess is even higher.

2. You didn't suggest it - my point was that you don't seem to understand it. Banks set their savings interest rates in order to generate sufficient deposits for their balance sheet. You demanding that they increase their savings rates when they don't need the money is effectively saying this.

3. I see how it could come across as rude (sorry), but it's difficult to not seem condescending when you're trying to explain simple concepts to someone who refuses to believe it.

You keep claiming you understand it, but it's abundantly clear you don't. Relying on tracker savings accounts is beyond absurd - you've already acknowledged there can be a large mismatch between mortgage lending and saving deposits, how on Earth is this a rational business move? How would this work in the scenario I gave at the beginning?

phillw said:

callum9999 said:2. You didn't suggest it - my point was that you don't seem to understand it. Banks set their savings interest rates in order to generate sufficient deposits for their balance sheet. You demanding that they increase their savings rates when they don't need the money is effectively saying this.

Which is why they offer issues with more attractive rates, as it allows them to get more money in without increasing the cost of the money they already have.

A tracker savings account would have to be set at a much lower rate

1. I’m clearly referring to standard variable rate mortgages here not contracted fixed rate mortgages. I’m not suggesting doubling the interest rate on the mortgage at all; I’m suggesting that any interest rate increase on the savings account should be half the increase on the mortgage, but even the increase on the mortgage would be relatively small and nowhere near doubling it!

2. I understand it perfectly well, thank you very much. I know full well that banks set their savings rates in order to generate sufficient deposits for their balance sheet! At no point have I ever demanded that they increase their savings rates when they don’t need the money! But clearly it doesn’t go down well with their savers, or enhance their overall reputation whenever mortgage rates are increased and savings rates either do not increase at all or, worse still, are reduced!

3. I don’t keep claiming anything at all actually but yes I do understand it perfectly clearly! What is undoubtedly abundantly clear is that you keep misreading, misinterpreting and misrepresenting what I’m advocating in order to suit your own, very clearly inflexible, positions!

I have never even remotely suggested that a savings & mortgage provider should rely on tracker savings accounts to the exclusion of more common types of savings account; I only ever implied in my original comments that I see no reason why there could not be a few more available than there currently are.

The idea of a tracker savings account to complement a tracker mortgage account would clearly be unsuitable for the scenario you gave at the beginning, but that is only one very specific and not that frequent a scenario! More commonly, a well run bank or building society would have roughly equal amounts of mortgage lending to the deposits they hold, say £1.5 bn in each case for the sake of argument. In this situation it is very far from beyond absurd, in fact it is entirely feasible for a bank or building society to have both a tracker mortgage and a tracker savings account. As I clearly stated before, it is a perfectly rational business move, assuming of course that the tracker savings account’s overall interest rate is set to be significantly lower than the tracker mortgage’s overall interest rate! Then the bank or building society can be fairly confident of bringing in significantly more money in mortgage interest than they’re paying out in savings interest!