Riskiest banks to save with

Rafter

I think the article is a bit sensationalist but I think savers should think twice about where they save before plunging for the top paying account.

Many former BCCI customers would agree. Sure they got their money back eventually, but after a long time and with no interest.

Personally I don't think sites like this should promote accounts from small overseas banks and suggest they are as safe as investing in a UK high street bank or building society. Best buy tables should also carry a health warning.

The government and other UK banks wouldn't allow one of their own to fail, and a rescue would be put in place.

This might not happen with an Icelandic bank though - and the population of Iceland is about the same as a small UK city, so their government may not have the ability to bail out its banking sector if something does go wrong.

R.

Steve_xx

It might be that the Icelandic government would act in a similar way to UK government if one of its banks ran into trouble. Who knows? Certainly if something went wrong at ICICI Bank it would spell disaster for India because I believe it is their second largest bank.

The 35k protection rule is the same for all banks that operate in the UK. Therefore, there's no real added protection to gain from staying with a UK only bank.

masonic

Rafter wrote: »

Personally I don't think sites like this should promote accounts from small overseas banks and suggest they are as safe as investing in a UK high street bank or building society. Best buy tables should also carry a health warning.

What about all the risky banks and building societies in the UK? Some of these articles suggest interest rate is proportional to risk, so should this site now advise people to go for the savings accounts with the lowest rates?

Steve_xx

masonic wrote: »

What about all the risky banks and building societies in the UK? Some of these articles suggest interest rate is proportional to risk, so should this site now advise people to go for the savings accounts with the lowest rates?

I don't think so. I don't think that this site is collectively qualified enough or sufficiently in the know about the happenings at any bank to advise anyone to go for accounts with lower rates.

The real point is that your cash, up to 35k is protected, and it is protected the same whether it is lodged in a low or a high risk bank.

Therefore, effectively there is no risk to an individual up to that amount. You cannot get better than no risk.

tradetime

masonic wrote: »

What about all the risky banks and building societies in the UK? Some of these articles suggest interest rate is proportional to risk, so should this site now advise people to go for the savings accounts with the lowest rates?

Yep that exactly where this line of argument is going, so you sit there with a big grin on your face pronouncing that your getting pants for your money....so it must be safe. My advice, if your that worried lob it all in NS&I and be done with it.