50k guarantee on deposits is a joke.
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 15,623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
50k guarantee on deposits is a joke.
So anyone who has just sold a house for 200k has to fanny about splitting it between 4 accounts. If they dont and the bank went bust, and the government did nothing, and they lost 150k, there would be anarchy on the streets. The whole economy would collapse. Knowing this, why dont the government reassure us it wont happen.
The 50k limit is just meaningless.
The 50k limit is just meaningless.
#6
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 15,623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#7
So anyone who has just sold a house for 200k has to fanny about splitting it between 4 accounts. If they dont and the bank went bust, and the government did nothing, and they lost 150k, there would be anarchy on the streets. The whole economy would collapse. Knowing this, why dont the government reassure us it wont happen.
Trending Topics
#8
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 15,623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They have tried to reassure us it won't happen. If it looks like a bank is going to go bust, they'll just bail it out - the alternative is anarchy as you say. The problem is that if they guarantee all deposits, those debts appear on their accounts - which has big implications. Mad really.
#11
Scooby Regular
#12
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 15,623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't it just a gesture more than anything? I mean the Irish guarantee covers the 6 largest banks, not all banks - and the German Guarantee could never be fulfilled if it actually came to *all* deposits falling over.
Brown could say " Yes I'll guarantee all savings, but its a bit of an empty promise (Irelaise it wouldn't be the first one). Ultimatley I suspect he will have to make the gurantee, but, if you thing that if all the banks collaspe you'll get all yuor money back, I suspect you would be dissapointed.
Of course, the likelyhood of all UK banks collapsing is remote in the extreme
Brown could say " Yes I'll guarantee all savings, but its a bit of an empty promise (Irelaise it wouldn't be the first one). Ultimatley I suspect he will have to make the gurantee, but, if you thing that if all the banks collaspe you'll get all yuor money back, I suspect you would be dissapointed.
Of course, the likelyhood of all UK banks collapsing is remote in the extreme
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: riding the crest of a wave ...
Posts: 46,493
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
To some extent the people who have benefitted from such 'wealth' created ( rolleyes) from the last few years are quite possibly going to have to prop up the whole system with thier ill-gotten 'gains'
#17
Scooby Regular
Plus, I don't know where all the money would be found to cover everyone and all banks.
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Worthing..
Posts: 7,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite how it would compensate around a trillion pounds I dont know.
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here, There, Everywhere
Posts: 10,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 535D M-Sport Touring
Posts: 3,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So anyone who has just sold a house for 200k has to fanny about splitting it between 4 accounts. If they dont and the bank went bust, and the government did nothing, and they lost 150k, there would be anarchy on the streets. The whole economy would collapse. Knowing this, why dont the government reassure us it wont happen.
The 50k limit is just meaningless.
The 50k limit is just meaningless.
#23
The problem is that we won't appear to lose money, but he can just phone up the printing presses and run off a few hundred billion - making us all poorer.
#24
Erm, not 100% on this but the impression i got from watching a discussion on this on question time the other night was that the government would on guarantee 50k per BANK not account, because the discussion has about certain savings institutions which were part of the same bank and that the saver would only be covered for 50k, even if he had 200k in 4 account which were all part of the same group, i.e online savings account etc..
Like i said though, not 100%
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: There is only one God - Elvis!
Posts: 8,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What was interesting was on GMTV this morning.
Say you had 50k in Bank 'A' and 50k in bank 'B' Just because they are seperate banks does not mean that your 100k is safe, only 50k is.
You are only covered up to 50k per financial institution!!!! the thing is they wont tell you which financial institution they belong to so you would have to find out on the internet and make sure your 100k say is deposited with different financial institutions.
Say you had 50k in Bank 'A' and 50k in bank 'B' Just because they are seperate banks does not mean that your 100k is safe, only 50k is.
You are only covered up to 50k per financial institution!!!! the thing is they wont tell you which financial institution they belong to so you would have to find out on the internet and make sure your 100k say is deposited with different financial institutions.
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: There is only one God - Elvis!
Posts: 8,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What was also interesting was the joint accounts, say you both had 80k in a joint account, yet another one of you had another 20k in another account, if the bank went belly up then you wouldn't get all your money. You'd lose 10 grand.
How?
Well your joint account would be safe - 80k divide 2 = 40k each, but you've already used up your allocated 40k so your 20k you'd only get 10k back out of the 20k.
Sounds silly i know, but thats how it is.
How?
Well your joint account would be safe - 80k divide 2 = 40k each, but you've already used up your allocated 40k so your 20k you'd only get 10k back out of the 20k.
Sounds silly i know, but thats how it is.
#27
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A powerslide near you
Posts: 10,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you've got more than £50k, speak to an accountant/financial advisor. You can make your money safe. off shore, selective use of accounts here etc....A far better option than crapping yourselves...
#28
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: There is only one God - Elvis!
Posts: 8,328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Erm, not 100% on this but the impression i got from watching a discussion on this on question time the other night was that the government would on guarantee 50k per BANK not account, because the discussion has about certain savings institutions which were part of the same bank and that the saver would only be covered for 50k, even if he had 200k in 4 account which were all part of the same group, i.e online savings account etc..
Like i said though, not 100%
Like i said though, not 100%
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
He didn't have a problem robbing the funds from the private pension funds in the first place though. So where do you think the money will come from to ensure savers don't loose out? Oh yeah, the tax payer and more than likely those who have lost their savings. Hardly a re-assurance is it?