Getting two interest pay-ins in my Barclays Everyday Saver account?

taihai

Hello all,

I have had my Barclays Everyday Saver account for years, but I only started to realise I might be getting two portions of interest from Barclays every month, starting from May 2023, which I am not too sure why.

So now at the beginning of each month (either 1st or 2nd), my Saver account will receive a pay-in with the description of 'INTEREST PAID GROSS', and another pay-in with the description 'INTEREST'. The former normally covers the beginning of the month till the end of the month, and the latter covers the middle of last month till the middle of this month.

To me, it feels strange to have two interest pay-ins each month (Not that I don't like it .) Just wanted to know why?

I am also thinking about moving my savings to Chase, which seems to provide a very good interest rate (4.1% AER interest) with instant access, compared to 1.6% (first £10k) and 1.16% (>£10k) from Barclays. But with the situation above, it seems Barclays is effectively giving double the interest rate, though arguably still below Chase's interest rate.

Any thoughts?

Best regards,
T

Middle_of_the_Road

No idea about the two interest payments, but you can do even better than Chase's 4.1%

Best savings accounts: 5.15% easy access or 5.16% fixed rates (moneysavingexpert.com)

taihai

Middle_of_the_Road said:

No idea about the two interest payments, but you can do even better than Chase's 4.1%

Best savings accounts: 5.15% easy access or 5.16% fixed rates (moneysavingexpert.com)

Thanks for your comment. 

Any recommendations other than Chase?

ColdIron

No idea about the extra interest but it is most odd

The Barclays Everyday Saver pays a truly terrible rate. Chase is a nice current account for the 1% cashback, I would open it for that alone but the savings account rate of 4.1% isn't great

There are lots of others in the link above, at 5.00% + but you might consider either Marcus or the Tesco Internet Saver. Both pay 4.75% variable so less than the top rates but very easy to open and operate, you could have it done and dusted in 30 minutes

Just a thought, but dump that awful Everyday Saver

AstonSmith

Do you have any other Barclays savings products, such as a savings bond or an ISA? Those generate a reference of just "INTEREST".

The "INTEREST PAID GROSS" is definitely from the Everyday Saver, and they always pay that on the 1st (or nearest working day).

taihai

ColdIron said:

No idea about the extra interest but it is most odd

The Barclays Everyday Saver pays a truly terrible rate. Chase is a nice current account for the 1% cashback, I would open it for that alone but the savings account rate of 4.1% isn't great

There are lots of others in the link above, at 5.00% + but you might consider either Marcus or the Tesco Internet Saver. Both pay 4.75% variable so less than the top rates but very easy to open and operate, you could have it done and dusted in 30 minutes

Just a thought, but dump that awful Everyday Saver

Thanks for the suggestion.

I did a quick search on FCA and finds something really odd about Marcus (and Chase too). See links below.

Marcus: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002k0d72QAA
Chase: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002uybPXQAY

Are they unauthorised firms that are not FCA regulated, meaning we are not protected by FCA if they go bankrupt in UK and we lose money? Are they genuine? 

Just in case it's not clear, the reference numbers I put into the FCA websites for these two firms are actually copied and pasted from the bottom of these two web pages. These websites feel genuine, and in fact they both pay for Google Ad. But the FCA findings make me unsure.

https://www.marcus.co.uk/uk/en
https://www.chase.co.uk/gb/en/

That said, I did try Chase and the debit card arrived a few days ago. Made some payments online and it worked. So it feels Chase is at least operational. But why FCA complaints about Chase?

T

taihai

AstonSmith said:

Do you have any other Barclays savings products, such as a savings bond or an ISA? Those generate a reference of just "INTEREST".

The "INTEREST PAID GROSS" is definitely from the Everyday Saver, and they always pay that on the 1st (or nearest working day).

Oh that might be it.

I have Fixed Term savings with Barlcays, and I vaguely remember I opted for interest paid every month into the Everyday Saver account. So perhaps what happens is this comes as INTEREST and Saver's own interest comes as INTEREST PAID GROSS.

ColdIron

taihai said:

ColdIron said:

No idea about the extra interest but it is most odd

The Barclays Everyday Saver pays a truly terrible rate. Chase is a nice current account for the 1% cashback, I would open it for that alone but the savings account rate of 4.1% isn't great

There are lots of others in the link above, at 5.00% + but you might consider either Marcus or the Tesco Internet Saver. Both pay 4.75% variable so less than the top rates but very easy to open and operate, you could have it done and dusted in 30 minutes

Just a thought, but dump that awful Everyday Saver

Thanks for the suggestion.

I did a quick search on FCA and finds something really odd about Marcus (and Chase too). See links below.

Marcus: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002k0d72QAA
Chase: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002uybPXQAY

Clones of legitimate firms unfortunately do exist and this is true for a great many organisations. They purport or claim to be legitimate companies but are not. It's easy and cheap to set up a basic website and post links on Facebook or wherever. If you put the names into the FCA site they will list the sites that have been reported to them. Even using the Financial Services Register number is no guarantee that the web site where you found them hasn't just pasted that as well. They play on that. You go onto a clone site, check the number and it comes up good. And then they steal your money

Are they unauthorised firms that are not FCA regulated, meaning we are not protected by FCA if they go bankrupt in UK and we lose money? Are they genuine?

The ones in the links above are clones. The website, email addresses and other details are wrong. They are not authorised. Don't use them

Just in case it's not clear, the reference numbers I put into the FCA websites for these two firms are actually copied and pasted from the bottom of these two web pages. These websites feel genuine, and in fact they both pay for Google Ad. But the FCA findings make me unsure.

https://www.marcus.co.uk/uk/en
https://www.chase.co.uk/gb/en/

The ones in your links above are genuine. If you use the Financial Services Register number from them they will find the authorised site (but recall my warning above). You can trust the web address reported by the FCA

Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan are very large and reputable US companies and fully authorised. I've used both for quite some time

But why FCA complaints about Chase?

The complaints are not about the legitimate sites but their clones

AmityNeon

taihai said:

I did a quick search on FCA and finds something really odd about Marcus (and Chase too). See links below.

Marcus: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002k0d72QAA
Chase: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002uybPXQAY

Are they unauthorised firms that are not FCA regulated, meaning we are not protected by FCA if they go bankrupt in UK and we lose money? Are they genuine?

Just in case it's not clear, the reference numbers I put into the FCA websites for these two firms are actually copied and pasted from the bottom of these two web pages. These websites feel genuine, and in fact they both pay for Google Ad. But the FCA findings make me unsure.

https://www.marcus.co.uk/uk/en
https://www.chase.co.uk/gb/en

I cannot replicate your findings. The reference numbers from the bottom of those two web pages are 124659 (Marcus) and 124579 (Chase). When those two reference numbers are searched in the FCA register (https://register.fca.org.uk), the following results appear (only one result per reference):

• Marcus: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/firm?id=001b000000MfF0NAAV
• Chase: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/firm?id=001b000000MfFBzAAN

What did you do that caused only clones to be found or appear so prominently as to obfuscate the genuine firms?

ColdIron

AmityNeon said:

taihai said:

I did a quick search on FCA and finds something really odd about Marcus (and Chase too). See links below.

Marcus: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002k0d72QAA
Chase: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002uybPXQAY

Are they unauthorised firms that are not FCA regulated, meaning we are not protected by FCA if they go bankrupt in UK and we lose money? Are they genuine?

Just in case it's not clear, the reference numbers I put into the FCA websites for these two firms are actually copied and pasted from the bottom of these two web pages. These websites feel genuine, and in fact they both pay for Google Ad. But the FCA findings make me unsure.

https://www.marcus.co.uk/uk/en
https://www.chase.co.uk/gb/en

What did you do that caused only clones to be found or appear so prominently as to obfuscate the genuine firms?

I am guessing that as the OP was leading from the names in my post or the common names that's what they started with. Marcus for Goldman Sachs International Bank and Chase for J.P. Morgan Europe Limited

AmityNeon

ColdIron said:

AmityNeon said:

taihai said:

I did a quick search on FCA and finds something really odd about Marcus (and Chase too). See links below.

Marcus: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002k0d72QAA
Chase: https://register.fca.org.uk/s/unauthorised-firm?id=0014G00002uybPXQAY

Are they unauthorised firms that are not FCA regulated, meaning we are not protected by FCA if they go bankrupt in UK and we lose money? Are they genuine?

Just in case it's not clear, the reference numbers I put into the FCA websites for these two firms are actually copied and pasted from the bottom of these two web pages. These websites feel genuine, and in fact they both pay for Google Ad. But the FCA findings make me unsure.

https://www.marcus.co.uk/uk/en
https://www.chase.co.uk/gb/en

What did you do that caused only clones to be found or appear so prominently as to obfuscate the genuine firms?

I am guessing that as the OP was leading from the names in my post or the common names that's what they started with. Marcus for Goldman Sachs International Bank and Chase for J.P. Morgan Europe Limited

They specifically mentioned inputting "reference numbers" into the FCA website. The company registration numbers result in nothing, so it's rather strange for someone to say one thing but do another, or perhaps they thought they did one thing and wrote about it, but actually did something else (like use a search engine).