Nationwide's 'Fairer Share' £100 payment for eligible members

wiseonesomeofthetime

metrobus said:

Exodi , I agree their savings rates have been nothing to write home about, but the new fairer 2 year bond at 4.75% is OK and it might persuade some of the sour grape mob on here to become active savers and then more likely to be eligible for the payout should there be one next year. Then I am sure they will stop their moaning.

Only "OK" is probably a fair expression for that rate tbh.

There are almost 20 two-year bonds with other providers with a greater rate. Top this morning is 4.96%

Section62

metrobus said:

Exodi , I agree their savings rates have been nothing to write home about, but the new fairer 2 year bond at 4.75% is OK and it might persuade some of the sour grape mob on here to become active savers and then more likely to be eligible for the payout should there be one next year. Then I am sure they will stop their moaning.

It appears you don't really understand what you are talking about, and just want to insult other forum members.

One of the issues people have is members who are very "active" savers won't be eligible for the £100 unless they also have a current account and jumped through the right hoops.

Being an "active" saver wasn't sufficient to get the payout.

The £340m fund has been generated - in part - because Nationwide have been paying their savers rates which "have been nothing to write home about".

So it isn't "sour grapes" or "moaning" to suggest that more of that £340m should have been used to sort out Nationwide's poor reputation for savings.

ForumUser7

wiseonesomeofthetime said:

metrobus said:

Exodi , I agree their savings rates have been nothing to write home about, but the new fairer 2 year bond at 4.75% is OK and it might persuade some of the sour grape mob on here to become active savers and then more likely to be eligible for the payout should there be one next year. Then I am sure they will stop their moaning.

Only "OK" is probably a fair expression for that rate tbh.

There are almost 20 two-year bonds with other providers with a greater rate. Top this morning is 4.96%

It is the highest 2 year fix from any provider with a proper branch network (Kent reliance has a branch network, but it is tiny and concentrated near, well, Kent).

There are all kinds of additional overhead costs nationwide will have, so IMO an offering 0.25% above the current base rate is good.

I suppose perhaps their online fairer share bond could have a higher rate, but they probably wouldn’t deem that as being fair to branch customers, as nationwide clearly values their branch service based on the pledges etc.

metrobus

wiseonesomeofthetime said:

metrobus said:

Exodi , I agree their savings rates have been nothing to write home about, but the new fairer 2 year bond at 4.75% is OK and it might persuade some of the sour grape mob on here to become active savers and then more likely to be eligible for the payout should there be one next year. Then I am sure they will stop their moaning.

Only "OK" is probably a fair expression for that rate tbh.

There are almost 20 two-year bonds with other providers with a greater rate. Top this morning is 4.96%

Correct,  but if it brings you an extra £100 by being an active saving member then anything less than around £50,000 in the NW Fair 2 year bond and you are better off.

BooJewels

But being an 'active saver' @metrobus wasn't enough in itself to get you the bonus - you also had to have a current account with £500/month being paid in.

metrobus

Section62 said:

metrobus said:

Exodi , I agree their savings rates have been nothing to write home about, but the new fairer 2 year bond at 4.75% is OK and it might persuade some of the sour grape mob on here to become active savers and then more likely to be eligible for the payout should there be one next year. Then I am sure they will stop their moaning.

It appears you don't really understand what you are talking about, and just want to insult other forum members.

One of the issues people have is members who are very "active" savers won't be eligible for the £100 unless they also have a current account and jumped through the right hoops.

Being an "active" saver wasn't sufficient to get the payout.

The £340m fund has been generated - in part - because Nationwide have been paying their savers rates which "have been nothing to write home about".

So it isn't "sour grapes" or "moaning" to suggest that more of that £340m should have been used to sort out Nationwide's poor reputation for savings.

Correct, I should have stated being an active saver was ONE of the conditions to get the bonus not the sole condition . Like NW stated it’s for members who treat NW as their main CA and actively save with them, if you don’t, unlucky better luck next time.👍

Albermarle

wiseonesomeofthetime said:

metrobus said:

Exodi , I agree their savings rates have been nothing to write home about, but the new fairer 2 year bond at 4.75% is OK and it might persuade some of the sour grape mob on here to become active savers and then more likely to be eligible for the payout should there be one next year. Then I am sure they will stop their moaning.

Only "OK" is probably a fair expression for that rate tbh.

There are almost 20 two-year bonds with other providers with a greater rate. Top this morning is 4.96%

As far back as I can remember, Nationwide never aspired to have the best table topping rates and even admitted it.
They did used to say that their rates would be always reasonably competitive and consistent, but this stopped happening for a number of years. In more recent times though, the rates have generally improved again. For a big player with a branch network, being 0.25% off the top of the table, is approx. back to where they used to be.

boingy

Exodi said:

... their would be similar complaints that Boingy is getting a bonus, despite holding no savings, no mortgage and an unused current account.

That would be a wrong assumption. I have an active regular saver account which has over £1000 in it. My current account and normal savings account are pretty much empty because of the paltry interest they currently pay. My Nationwide mortgage was paid off a few years ago. And there are going to be members with more much active current accounts who don't meet the very arbitrary criteria. I just think they should treat all members equally. I'm also thinking that their complains department are going to be quite busy politely but firmly rejecting all the complaints!

Section62

metrobus said:

Section62 said:

Correct, I should have stated being an active saver was ONE of the conditions to get the bonus not the sole condition . Like NW stated it’s for members who treat NW as their main CA and actively save with them, if you don’t, unlucky better luck next time.👍

Which demonstrates the point I made at the top of this page.

That Nationwide have created a situation where some members opt to exhibit the "better luck next time losers"-type approach should give all members who believe in mutuality cause for concern.

Nationwide makes a big fuss about how it seeks to be better than that.  This time it is failing badly.

t1redmonkey

boingy said:

Exodi said:

... their would be similar complaints that Boingy is getting a bonus, despite holding no savings, no mortgage and an unused current account.

That would be a wrong assumption. I have an active regular saver account which has over £1000 in it. My current account and normal savings account are pretty much empty because of the paltry interest they currently pay. My Nationwide mortgage was paid off a few years ago. And there are going to be members with more much active current accounts who don't meet the very arbitrary criteria. I just think they should treat all members equally. I'm also thinking that their complains department are going to be quite busy politely but firmly rejecting all the complaints!

Would be interested if anyone does actually make a formal complaint on the distribution of this money, and if so, if any of them actually get upheld.

I know on the surface of it it seems like none of them would be, but complaint handlers do have discretion to bring their own judgement into some cases; I know as I worked as a complaints handler at a financial institution for a few years. 

Looking through the thread, @BooJewels must be one of the most 'edge' cases there is where they've said they paid £1000 in the months they were looking at, yet did it in a slightly different way to what Nationwide wanted (£600 in one and £400 in another).  I wonder if in those sorts of cases if they'd give any leeway and make some sort of payment to resolve the complaint, or if they will just rigidly stick to the line of not paying out however close someone was to making the criteria.