Best savings accounts?
- Thread starter Vegeta
- Start date
Associate
LTSB 3.7 % ISA two year term. I think there are some 4% deals around for two year terms. Suits me.
Soldato
I always disagree with Fox in these threads, get a fixed account all the way. Some have penalties that are meagre for withdrawal (like loss of interest on the amount withdrawn) and you get a better rate.
I'd personally go with Lloyds 3.7% two year account. You get interest paid once a year.
I'd personally go with Lloyds 3.7% two year account. You get interest paid once a year.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
But the money is locked away for 2 years and for what?
They used to make sense when the interest was significantly higher but for half a per cent tops how can it possibly be worth losing access to your money for 2 years?
Suspended
Nationwide Mysave and similar Santander account both good. Nationwide one only allows 1 withdrawl. Santander allows as many as you want. Have Just split 90k between the 2.
Suspended
[TW]Fox;21789573 said:
Depends how much is in there old chap, once I gain more than £100 from switching around I do it.
Plus of course the fact the 0.04% not being worth it is your view.
Oh and the fact I am losing the 3.11% imminently and will have to drop to 3% with Santander as you cant get 3.11% now means its about to go to 0.15% difference.
[TW]Fox;21789573 said:
This is where I can't see your argument, I can make 4 withdrawls, I tend to make none from these types of account or maybe one, but typically one will be to close the account. IF for some completely unexepected reason I end up having to make 3 withdrawls then I will move the remaining account balance to another account. Its not locked away unless your the sort of person who has to constantly dip in and out of savings.
If you are one of them you want the savings at the same provider as your current account really anyway. Fast payments isn't guaranteed and I have certainly had a regular payment that faster payments rejected and I had to wait for the automatic resend to go through so it took practically half a day. Stick to same provider and you do not have that risk, savings to current or vice versa instantly.
Last edited:
Suspended
[TW]Fox;21790844 said:
Some truth in both views here, some will lose you a little interest on withdrawl some will eg affect the whole balance for a month.
It depends on the person, the amount and the likelyhood that will want access to the funds. Access may be required for a reason they need the actual money (closing/reducing ISA balance) or because interest rates have lept upwards.
The main risk is what you consider interest rates will do, if you think they will rise within a year locking needs to be much more closely inspected, the right locks with a little timing are almost non existant anyway due to applying future penalties. Its not as simple as lock = bad.
There is no one fits all approach and without knowing the money management skills of individuals its hard to say whats best anyway.
For sure though rates are ceeping up over time. They plummeted too far with the move down to 0.5% base rate and the banks want the savings investments. People generally are becoming more aware of rates and that bank loyalty costs them so they are I believe in effect forcing all banks to have competitive products which dont take much effort to chase down.
Well we know how much is in there for the OP.
If you have £50,000 there (Which I'd hope you didnt as I'm sure you could find something better to do with £50k but for the sake of argument we'll run with it) that extra 0.04% is making an extra 20 quid a YEAR. on 50 GRAND
Suspended
[TW]Fox;21792788 said:Well we know how much is in there for the OP.
If you have £50,000 there (Which I'd hope you didnt as I'm sure you could find something better to do with £50k but for the sake of argument we'll run with it) that extra 0.04% is making an extra 20 quid a YEAR. on 50 GRAND
Its more than £50k but sooner or later I need it (house related lets say) hence its in instant access.
And I told you I am imminently losing the 3.11% Santander so hence finding the now best account, which is the Coventry at 3.15%.
I have an issue with teh government protection limits, lets leave it at that.
Coventry at 3.15% is still > than Santander at 3%
If OP needs to keep taking monies in and out he can have both, leave the main bit in an account paying 3.15% and short term balancing funds in 3%.
Santander was the best account on the market for some time but its not now unless you absolutely have to keep paying in and out regularly, but OP inferred he was just paying in so he should have no issues with 4 withdrawl limit.
Associate
The best savings account you can get is to pay as much off your mortgage on overpayments as you can. The saving on interest you get there will be massive compared to any rates you get for leaving cash in the bank.
Suspended
[TW]Fox;21792850 said:
So he may as well put it elsewhere at 2.75% then.
No, more is more.
3.15% is > 3% so why take 3% when you can have 3.15%.
I am not arguing the Santander is not a good account its market leading if you need to repeatedly take money out but if your saving and don't why go for 3% when you can get 3.15%.
The whole point about saving is to maximise your gain and limit the inflationary impact on your capital. Taking a lower rate isn't doing that.
As he is saving for his house deposit I suspect he doesn't have a mortgage.
Suspended
50% true.
The OP hasn't got a mortgage so that fails in this case.
And secondly and more importantly when you make overpayments they are NOT taken into account should you fall into arrears. Yes if you have significant savings you want to pay down debt (mortgage should be last in that list typically), but you should also ensure that you have some emergency funds available. Certainly 3-6 months of mortgage payments so that should you lose your job you can pay 3-6 months before you even start to run the risk of falling into arrears.
That is not true. I strongly advise against it. You seem to be advising it instead of savings and that's what's wrong. It isn't necessarily wrong in addition to savings.
To start off with you can usually find parity with a good savings account. Tracker mortgage rates have been lower than ISA rates for the past 10 years, on average. If you had a decent tracker in 2006 or before then you'd be on a rate of 1.5% or so, while your ISA would be at 2.5%. So you can actually make money by saving rather than paying off your mortgage - however it's not much really.
Rob Skinner has picked up on something else - you can't just put your hand back into your mortgage.
The only time I'd suggest people pay off their mortgage is to lower the LTV to get a better rate, and only once they have some savings built up. Either that or when you've reached the cash ISA allowance, this year it's £5640.
Associate
I didnt say burn all your savings i just said that the best saving you get is paying off interest on the biggest loan you will ever take.
As for not putting hand back into mortgage, well as has been stated if you have a lower LTV then you can dip back on a remortgage at a better rate. Another saving?
Anyway ill pay my 20 year mortgage off in 15 and see how much i save, i'll see your ISA and raise you any time
As for not putting hand back into mortgage, well as has been stated if you have a lower LTV then you can dip back on a remortgage at a better rate. Another saving?
Anyway ill pay my 20 year mortgage off in 15 and see how much i save, i'll see your ISA and raise you any time
Anyway ill pay my 20 year mortgage off in 15 and see how much i save, i'll see your ISA and raise you any time
Less than the ISA - at least using historic rates. Your option isn't a bad one, as long as you keep at least some savings.
As for LTV assuring you can dip back into your mortgage that is false. You lose your job and need that 30K that would have been in your ISA but is in your mortgage? Can't touch it.
Associate
[TW]Fox;21792868 said:
Agreed, i just skipped to the end.
You can't do that if you've lost your job and are rapidly running out of money, though.