Regular Savings Accounts: The Best Currently Available List!

flaneurs_lobster

rallycurve said:

Finally they give some love to that account which used to be market leader. A bit too late since many of us moved the money elsewhere months ago. Plus it isn't such a great rate: only 0.1% extra than the top  easy access account (multiple withdrawals and no monthly limit). Still good move from Principality 

Principality BS seem very specific in their eligibility criteria

• You can only open this account if you do not own or have not previously owned a property.

Is it enforced/do people here ignore the restriction (like the Coventry FHS which was a little more obtuse with its rules)?

subjecttocontract

flaneurs_lobster said:

rallycurve said:

Finally they give some love to that account which used to be market leader. A bit too late since many of us moved the money elsewhere months ago. Plus it isn't such a great rate: only 0.1% extra than the top  easy access account (multiple withdrawals and no monthly limit). Still good move from Principality 

Principality BS seem very specific in their eligibility criteria

• You can only open this account if you do not own or have not previously owned a property.

Is it enforced/do people here ignore the restriction (like the Coventry FHS which was a little more obtuse with its rules)?

Certainly not.....rules is rules and must be complied with. Hopefully every contributor to this forum ensures that they abide by the rules. If not, they shouldn't be allowed to access the forum. Why would it be acceptable to knowingly break the rules just because you thought it was ok or didn't apply to you ?

wiseonesomeofthetime

Plenty on here clearly chance their arm. But then, you've been here long enough to know that 😁

subjecttocontract

Do they ?
I'm not aware of anyone posting to say they have managed to break the rules.
Surely the MSE website wouldn't allow that behavior.

Nick_C

There have been lots of posts about breaking the rules with LBG.

surreysaver

Halifax/ Lloyds Regular Savers people have been abusing. Virgin Regular Savers that were paying interest twice. Tesco direct debits. Post Office savings direct debits. NatWest/RBS Digital Savers creating debit card purchases.
I'm sure there's others 

subjecttocontract

I don't read everything on this forum so it would be easy for me to miss these posts BUT I assume the moderators do read it all and presumably by allowing rule breaking information to be published they are ensuring that MSE promotes rule breaking. Doesn't sound right to me.

surreysaver

Don't think moderators read everything, only if things are brought to their attention by users reporting posts.
Not rule breaking per se, more a case of abusing loopholes. Organisations aren't going to list rules saying don't do this, that or the other, as it would just draw attention to their systems which don't work 

subjecttocontract

surreysaver said:

Not rule breaking per se, more a case of abusing loopholes. Organisations aren't going to list rules saying don't do this, that or the other, as it would just draw attention to their systems which don't work 

Who told you that ?
This discussion began when someone quoted the Principality BS eligibility criteria for one of their accounts.....'You can only open this account if you do not own or have not previously owned a property'. That's called a rule, there is no loophole.  You either comply or BREAK that rule by pretending to meet the criteria.

Some people think that behaviour is acceptable, I don't and when there is rule breaking I also think it's important that MSE are not complicit by allowing posts that discuss rule breaking.

WillPS

surreysaver said:

Halifax/ Lloyds Regular Savers people have been abusing. Virgin Regular Savers that were paying interest twice. Tesco direct debits. Post Office savings direct debits. NatWest/RBS Digital Savers creating debit card purchases.
I'm sure there's others 

Only the first of those is actually a defined rule being broken, and then only in the case of Lloyds. The others are just using provided facilities for unintended purposes, and in the case of the Virgin regular savers a straight forward bank error IIRC?