There but for the grace of God...

[cojak]

There were a number of factors as to why I didn't, had they been a longer-term player in the UK finance market I might well have done.

I take responsibility for my financial decisions and not all of them have worked (Rathbone Special Reserve ISA, anyone? ).

I'm at a loss that people who otherwise are careful of risks in other areas of their lives are now running around going 'woe is me', that's all....

[Cyberman]

Bit harsh on those that used them imo. If a company's duty is to offer to market the best product they possibly can and as a consumer your duty is to look for what appears to be the best deal then why not go for it. That 'greed' you refer to is something that we are all guilty of in some way on an almost daily basis i.e. every time we purchase something there is a cost/quality/reliability etc etc decision to be made.

Bottom line: I don't believe the investors deserve what has happened to them one iota.

The fact is that the majority of shareholders are employees through the share option scheme and small shareholders and pensioners via the privatisation. I don't think that they were gamblers somehow.

[TheFaQQer]

There were a number of factors as to why I didn't, had they been a longer-term player in the UK finance market I might well have done.

I take responsibility for my financial decisions and not all of them have worked (Rathbone Special Reserve ISA, anyone? ).

I'm at a loss that people who otherwise are careful of risks in other areas of their lives are now running around going 'woe is me', that's all....

Because most people do not see putting money into an established bank as a gamble. You never see a statement at the bottom of an advert for a bank that says "the value of your account may suddenly go down to nothing if we screw up and run off with all your cash", yet you do see "the value of shares can go down as well as up". Maybe we should, but saving in a bank has traditionally been viewed as safer than sticking it under your matress - alas that's not the case these days.

[Bob Dalek]

Icesave was a top tip on every financial guru's web site.

I wonder if any of them feel a bit embarrassed about their Top Tips?

[cojak]

Are Icelandic banks safe?

An article from February....

[Bagpuss]

I'm at a loss that people who otherwise are careful of risks in other areas of their lives are now running around going 'woe is me', that's all....

Icesave was supposed guaranteed by the FSCS and the passport scheme
What happened here was a criminal act, i.e. not fulfilling these obligations. No savers could have known that would happen, so hardy careless. It should have been risk free up to 35k.

KE was guaranteed by the FSCS 100% - nobody has lost any money as it's been taken over by ING.

What we have here is a situation where these guarantees (should the proverbial hit the fan) become meangless. This could happen again, so who would you trust?

A British bank? Which one? Many of them are owned overseas.


from your article

To put this in perspective for you: both banks have a credit rating which is equivalent to, if not higher than, a number of other financial businesses in the UK including Abbey, Alliance & Leicester (who incidentally are also on Moody's watchlist), Bradford & Bingley, ICICI and Standard Life Bank.

I hope you don't bank with Abbey or Alliance and Leicester. Still you would know wouldn't you?

[Bob Dalek]

Are Icelandic banks safe?

An article from February....

And from that article: "What's more, Landsbanki has no exposure to sub-prime debt unlike many banks in the UK, and it isn't heavily reliant on wholesale money markets, which means it may be more resistant to the repercussions of the credit crunch than some."

[cojak]

On a possitive note perhaps your tealeaves can tell us the next bank likely to go under? Is it a greedy one from the top of the interest list?

ICICI Bank UK

[cojak]

And from that article: "What's more, Landsbanki has no exposure to sub-prime debt unlike many banks in the UK, and it isn't heavily reliant on wholesale money markets, which means it may be more resistant to the repercussions of the credit crunch than some."

##

But don't put more than £35k in it...

I didn't believe that statement, btw...

[Cyberman]

Icesave was supposed guaranteed by the FSCS and the passport scheme
What happened here was a criminal act, i.e. not fulfilling these obligations. No savers could have known that would happen, so hardy careless. It should have been risk free up to 35k.

KE was guaranteed by the FSCS 100% - nobody has lost any money as it's been taken over by ING.

What we have here is a situation where these guarantees (should the proverbial hit the fan) become meangless. This could happen again, so who would you trust?

A British bank? Which one? Many of them are owned overseas.



from your article

To put this in perspective for you: both banks have a credit rating which is equivalent to, if not higher than, a number of other financial businesses in the UK including Abbey, Alliance & Leicester (who incidentally are also on Moody's watchlist), Bradford & Bingley, ICICI and Standard Life Bank.

I hope you don't bank with Abbey or Alliance and Leicester. Still you would know wouldn't you?

All that US Subprime had AAA credit-rating and thus UK banks bought it ....except Northern Rock . It's meaningless when so many are driven by greed and commission !!


Abbey are now owned by Santander who Atw reckons are the safest bank in the universe..... They are Spanish and I have serious doubts.