Chip have not paid interest, why do Money Saving Expert recommend them?

jimjames

AmityNeon said:

Band7 said:

I have no compulsion of any sort. I just don't understand why, when you have discovered what you deem to be outright deception, you just write about it on a public forum, which does nothing to have such deception stopped at source.

Why should I? Is it my duty to police deceptive business practices? I’ve suffered no financial loss, and after personal investigation possess greater awareness of Chip’s operations, sufficient for me to continue holding my savings with them.

I would say yes, I think it's a public duty to report deceptive business practices. I did so repeatedly for London Capital & Finance despite personally suffering no financial loss. If everyone only acted when they had suffered themselves then it wouldn't be very nice to watch others getting deceived as a result.

AmityNeon

jimjames said:

AmityNeon said:

Band7 said:

I have no compulsion of any sort. I just don't understand why, when you have discovered what you deem to be outright deception, you just write about it on a public forum, which does nothing to have such deception stopped at source.

Why should I? Is it my duty to police deceptive business practices? I’ve suffered no financial loss, and after personal investigation possess greater awareness of Chip’s operations, sufficient for me to continue holding my savings with them.

I would say yes, I think it's a public duty to report deceptive business practices. I did so repeatedly for London Capital & Finance despite personally suffering no financial loss. If everyone only acted when they had suffered themselves then it wouldn't be very nice to watch others getting deceived as a result.

I'm too jaded to care about going through red tape where the deception (in this instance) does not cause meaningful loss, outright as it may be. Chip only has my direct personal attention insofar as they offer the highest rate, or fail to pay it. I do remain curious about the case mentioned earlier where Chip paid compensation stemming from a complaint regarding underpaid interest.

Malthusian

jimjames said:

I would say yes, I think it's a public duty to report deceptive business practices. I did so repeatedly for London Capital & Finance despite personally suffering no financial loss. If everyone only acted when they had suffered themselves then it wouldn't be very nice to watch others getting deceived as a result.

I had to deal with this question of ethics when I pointed out errors in a Which article which could have caused significant consumer detriment and was asked if I'd told Which about them (I hadn't and still haven't). 
Which's website and Chip's adverts are not in my control whereas my posts on this forum are. Pointing out a magazine's errors to them or making a report to the ASA has a very slim chance of getting the material removed completely while pointing them out here has a 100% chance of countering it for everyone who reads this thread (unless it gets removed by the mods). People reading MSE fall into the category of "people I care about" (as absurd as it might be to value the financial awareness of people I've never met) while people reading Chip adverts do not.
Anyway, this started with an Internet argument gambit which I'm going to call the "appeal to apathy".
A: X is a bad thing.
B: Do you donate any money to the Society To Stop X?
A: No.
B: Therefore you do not care about X, therefore you are wrong and X is a good thing. 
There's a whole sandwich of non-sequiturs in the last argument but the hope is that A is too busy justifying why they don't donate any money to the Society to Stop X to notice.

Band7

False advertising is another new one. When/where did CHIP advertise false information about their instant access saver (which this thread is about)?

grumbler

The OP is. The title isn't. Neither is the thread.

Malthusian

Band7 said:

False advertising is another new one. When/where did CHIP advertise false information about their instant access saver (which this thread is about)?

"I never thought the Leopards Eating People's Faces Bank would eat my face, says angry depositor who put their money in LEPF Bank's "We Won't Eat Your Face (Maybe) Account."
(See page 4 for the reasons why putting your money in a currently best-buy savings account with a bank known for misleading advertising may be undesirable. Depending on how likely you are to say "Fiddle de dee, tomorrow is another day to open yet another bank account" when they bait-and-switch and drop the interest.)

flaneurs_lobster

Malthusian said:

Depending on how likely you are to say "Fiddle de dee, tomorrow is another day to open yet another bank account" when they bait-and-switch and drop the interest.)

I am very likely to open another bank account (or more likely move my money to an existing account) if and when they decrease their interest rate. 

I am unlikely to say "Fiddle de dee". 

You dont like Chip because they have iffy (false?) advertising, unconventional interest periods, stupid auto-save settings, the colour scheme of their app, whatever. Then don't use them, simple. 

EthicsGradient

lumens said:

According to the "Top savings accounts" page, Chip is the best easy-access savings account with a rate of 3.55%. However, there are dozens of reviews on TrustPilot showing that interest is not being received, that customer support isn't reachable, and that people are unable to get their money back: trustpilot.com/review/getchip.uk

Can MSE either get Chip to fix their systems, or stop recommending them? 

It's not up to MSE to monitor the unverified TrustPilot reviews and take action on them. If TrustPilot want to show themselves to be a meaningful organization, then they could take up the cases of the reviews they publish by contacting Chip. They won't, of course, because they're a forum for venting.

phillw

Malthusian said:
"I never thought the Leopards Eating People's Faces Bank would eat my face, says angry depositor who put their money in LEPF Bank's "We Won't Eat Your Face (Maybe) Account."

The irony is that instead you put your money into an account that pays less interest, and they use the increased profits to buy leopards to eat your face.

Maybe there should just be a post in the forum for people to shout at clouds?

ForumUser7

phillw said:

Malthusian said:
"I never thought the Leopards Eating People's Faces Bank would eat my face, says angry depositor who put their money in LEPF Bank's "We Won't Eat Your Face (Maybe) Account."

The irony is that instead you put your money into an account that pays less interest, and they use the increased profits to buy leopards to eat your face.

Maybe there should just be a post in the forum for people to shout at clouds?

If by 'shout at clouds' you mean like a board to vent on, there is: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/categories/praise-vent-warnings