Regular Savings Accounts: The Best Currently Available List!

cricidmuslibale

Rich2808 said:

cricidmuslibale said:

colsten said:

RG2015 said:

He also said that they have had a lot of feedback, and that their IT people were attempting to update the software to decline any applications breaching this rule.

Well done all who helped achieve this 🤬🤬🤬

Too right! Why don't people ever realise that if a savings provider is accidentally / unintentionally benefiting you in one way or another it's nearly always the best policy to discuss it, when necessary, in a discreet manner and, crucially, be aware that, if you bring the unintentional benefit to the attention of the actual savings provider, you, and many others like you, may well lose that benefit permanently!?

Sorry - but the provider is not accidentally or unintentionally benefitting people - those people have (in most cases) deliberately chosen to ignore the terms and conditions that provider has set and open multiple accounts for a product when only one is permitted at anyone time.
If its accidental and unknowing - that is fair enough - but when its done knowingly that is another matter.
Its the savings equivalent of saying its ok to exceed the speed limit in your car - as long as you don't get caught!
Well Coventry have identified the flaws in their controls - and are now ensuring the rules are followed. 
Hardly worth stressing over either way though!

I couldn't disagree more! All the evidence is that quite a few people have successfully managed and currently are successfully managing to hold more than one issue of Coventry's regular savers, and especially with Issue 4, the T's and C's were by no means entirely clear that one couldn't hold a previous issue regular saver at the same time! Thus when I state that Coventry has at least until recently 'accidentally / unintentionally benefited' a significant number of its savers this statement is an evidence-based one! Whether people have deliberately chosen to ignore terms and conditions or, far more likely in this case especially with Issue 4, not been entirely sure about how many Coventry regular savers they can hold at any one time and thus made an entirely understandable decision that they could reasonably apply for a second one as long as it was a different issue from the first one, does not change the fact that Coventry may not have intended to accidentally / unintentionally benefit some of its savers but, by not making the T's and C's entirely clear and unambiguous for every issue, not preventing those who have a previous issue regular saver from successfully applying for the latest issue regular saver, and not appearing to worry unduly about those who have more than one regular saver with them, that is precisely what they have done!! (at least up until very recently)

soulsaver

Where's that yawn emoji..?

Rich2808

soulsaver said:

Where's that yawn emoji..?

You could always just send us to Coventry!
Its all BS (for building society) - anyway.
PS They aren't the only provider who have been letting you break their rules on opening multiple regular savers.

SFindlay

Rich2808 said:

cricidmuslibale said:

colsten said:

RG2015 said:

He also said that they have had a lot of feedback, and that their IT people were attempting to update the software to decline any applications breaching this rule.

Well done all who helped achieve this 🤬🤬🤬

Too right! Why don't people ever realise that if a savings provider is accidentally / unintentionally benefiting you in one way or another it's nearly always the best policy to discuss it, when necessary, in a discreet manner and, crucially, be aware that, if you bring the unintentional benefit to the attention of the actual savings provider, you, and many others like you, may well lose that benefit permanently!?

Sorry - but the provider is not accidentally or unintentionally benefitting people - those people have (in most cases) deliberately chosen to ignore the terms and conditions that provider has set and open multiple accounts for a product when only one is permitted at anyone time.
If its accidental and unknowing - that is fair enough - but when its done knowingly that is another matter.
Its the savings equivalent of saying its ok to exceed the speed limit in your car - as long as you don't get caught!
Well Coventry have identified the flaws in their controls - and are now ensuring the rules are followed. 
Hardly worth stressing over either way though!

Rich2808 - Yet on 2nd February this year you stated "I don't think Virgin are enforcing their terms and conditions - although no harm logging into the app reading an article for ten seconds and getting 5 points every few weeks to keep you busy during lockdown!" So you were happy enough to in your words "break the speed limit"?? Seems you are displaying double standards depending which financial institution is being discussed!! 

veryintrigued

Can we get back to identying Regular Savers folks?

SFindlay

veryintrigued said:

Can we get back to identying Regular Savers folks?

Good idea rather than putting hurdles in front of people opening them by helping institutions close loop holes!! 
Have you identified a new one veryintrigued? 

Rich2808

veryintrigued said:

Can we get back to identying Regular Savers folks?

Happy to do that - dredging up poster's old posts at 1.48am perhaps isn't the best use of anyone's time!
But perhaps a lesson in my defence that there is a big difference between terms and conditions (you can only open one such account) and guidance which is matter of judgement (e,g, 'you must be a user of the Virgin money homebuying app' - does that require using the app once, daily or annually)?
In the end the most important issue with regular savers as well as the headline rate are the rules:
how much can you invest monthly (minimum and max)?
is it per calendar month or as with the Coventry linked to the opening date in a month
can you miss payments each month or make multiple payments up to the limit
is the rate variable or fixed
is there a fixed term
can you make withdrawals before maturity and if so how many and
last but not least
can you have or open more than one account!!
Isn't that the point of this thread in the end - being clear about the terms and conditions for each account as if you break them you may see the account closed or not get the advertised rate! Which is the point I was making.

schiff

I don't recollect any set of T&Cs, not only with RSs, that leaves at least one unclear T&C. 
It is in the MSE genes to take advantage - remember Gambling Introductory Loopholes - and that's what certain of us have done. 

colsten

Super service from Principality BS. I got email to remind me that an RS was going to mature, and I could select from a list of maturity options in online banking. I chose payment of my balance to my current account, and this promptly arrived in my current account this morning. Excellent company to deal with.

Rich2808

schiff said:

I don't recollect any set of T&Cs, not only with RSs, that leaves at least one unclear T&C. 
It is in the MSE genes to take advantage - remember Gambling Introductory Loopholes - and that's what certain of us have done. 

I certainly agree it would be useful for building society and bank staff who write terms and conditions and associated summary details on their website to be able to form coherent sentences which are not open to multiple interpretations!
Coventry still have this wording 'you can only have one version of a regular saver at a time'.  Why include the words 'version of a' - if you mean only one regular saver in total? Or do you in fact mean not 'version of' but 'issue of' - does this mean you can have an issue 4 and an issue 5 but not two issue 5s? 
I expect its the former they actually mean - but those 3 words confuse matters.
https://www.coventrybuildingsociety.co.uk/consumer/product/savings/regular_saver/regular-saver-5.html