Regular Savings Accounts: The Best Currently Available List!

EarthBoy

checkmate9999 wrote: »

The problem with most of these regular savers is that being fixed term for 12 months the headline rate flatters the product. Only your first months saving will realise the full rate. Every subsequent months deposit will receive only the proportion of the year remaining which means the actual rate of return at the end of the year will be considerably below the headline rate. .

The rate of return is always exactly what is advertised.

checkmate9999 wrote: »

Perhaps suitable for savers who actually do just deposit residual income from every months earnings , but for others with capital who have exhausted high rate accounts they are a pain in the proverbial.

Regular savers are not meant for lump sum deposits, that's not what they were designed for. They are excellent for people who want to save monthly. If you think they're a pain the bum, don't use them.

checkmate9999

"The rate of return is always exactly what is advertised"
I did not say it wasn't. I used the expression "flatters" to indicate that the headline rate and actual rate of return on the total funds deposited are not the same. For example in the last month of a 12 month fixed term the deposit receives the headline rate ,but does so for only 1/12th of the period. The cumulative effect of this across the term means that the net return on all funds deposited is well below the headline rate. That was my point and I am not sure why you opted to misunderstand it.
As for using them I do , but only those offering 6%pa which over the course of a year of regular deposits nets down to just over 4% on the total funds deposited.

Archi_Bald

Are you seriously expecting that you get 12 months worth of interest for money that you had only deposited for 1 month? #RealityCheckNeeded

veryintrigued

colsten wrote: »

Not that old chestnut again!

As has been discussed countless times, the full rate applies throughout the duration of the term. There is no reduction of any sort of the interest rate - it's a fixed rate.

Checkmate indeed

EarthBoy

checkmate9999 wrote: »

The cumulative effect of this across the term means that the net return on all funds deposited is well below the headline rate. That was my point and I am not sure why you opted to misunderstand it.

You receive the headline rate, you don't receive "well below" it. All interest rates quoted for all savings accounts are per year. If you pay money into a regular saver account every month, you will receive the same interest as you would from paying the same monthly payments into a bog standard easy access account every month if the advertised interest rate was the same .

As Martin Lewis himself says:

"Don't believe the bad press

Sadly, regular saver accounts often receive negative publicity due to a flawed understanding. Many people say they've used regular savers, but only received around half the interest they thought they would. Yet that's because they expected the wrong amount, not because they were underpaid."

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/best-regular-savings-accounts

le_loup

checkmate9999 wrote: »

As for using them I do , but only those offering 6%pa which over the course of a year of regular deposits nets down to just over 4% on the total funds deposited.

No, it results in 6% on the total funds deposited for the time that they are deposited.
You say that you use these accounts; you say you understand these accounts but you insist on misleading others who are perhaps not as wise as you.
A monthly saver does exactly what it says is on the tin.

checkmate9999

Let me clarify.
The product is marketed at 6%pa for example. That number is the headline number that attracts. It is correctly applied has you cite. I never questioned that. However, for the reader who actually reads the original post I stated this flatters the product because the actual net return on the total funds deposited over the term is actually 3.3% assuming regular deposits . My point being that when so many people cannot even pass what used to be the 11 plus in math will they understand the difference ? Now consider that most regular saver accounts are 3%pa or less then in effect they net out below 2% over the 12 month term. Again the point is that with the advent of so many high rate paying current accounts then settling for less with caveats attached regarding access appears to lack any attraction other than for those lacking in self discipline.
Now that's a reasonable response since I can tell you I was shocked by the replies which went from derogatory through to mildly obnoxious. On that note children please take back your playground as I was here mistakenly ;)thinking it was a forum.

saintalan

Methinks rather than you being mistaken that it is us, thinking that you are serious!

veryintrigued

checkmate9999 wrote: »

My point being that when so many people cannot even pass what used to be the 11 plus in math will they understand the difference ?

You're getting the advertised rate on every single penny you save.

As people are trying to tell you it doesnt 'flatter the product' - it states exactly what you'll expect to get back.

P.S its 'maths' or 'mathematics' over here!

Archi_Bald

checkmate9999, you have been given plenty of information and links that should allow you to figure out where you are going wrong with your thinking. Instead, you are just continuing to squirt out more nonsense. You are in a deep hole already, stop digging.