Not all banks are going bust.

[Jet Cash]

I've just been notified by my bank that they are paying me £100 under their fairer share policy. I'm with a UK "bank" called Nationwide. Well it isn't really a bank in the full sense of the word, but it provides a range of current accounts, savings account, and credit cards, and it offers mortgages. It is really categorised as a mutual building society, and the customers have an interest in the banks priofitability. It seems that they made so much money last year, that they are giving eligible customers a £100 payment. I don't have to do anything to receive this. I suspect that they were so profitable because there are government restrictions on the type of activities that they can undertake. For example, they can't lend money to foreign countries, or to businesses, and they can't indulge in the speculative financial instruments that havce bankrupted many of the true banks.

I believe that the abundance of toxic loans that are in the books of so many banks are part of a policy to force out smaller banks, and centralise banking into a few major international players. The toxic loans have also been used to transfer wealth away from much of the world population, and into the coffers of the wealthy banking elite.

[1714983746]

1714983746

[1714983746]

1714983746

[EarnOnVictor]

I've just been notified by my bank that they are paying me £100 under their fairer share policy. I'm with a UK "bank" called Nationwide. Well it isn't really a bank in the full sense of the word, but it provides a range of current accounts, savings account, and credit cards, and it offers mortgages. It is really categorised as a mutual building society, and the customers have an interest in the banks priofitability. It seems that they made so much money last year, that they are giving eligible customers a £100 payment. I don't have to do anything to receive this. I suspect that they were so profitable because there are government restrictions on the type of activities that they can undertake. For example, they can't lend money to foreign countries, or to businesses, and they can't indulge in the speculative financial instruments that havce bankrupted many of the true banks.

I believe that the abundance of toxic loans that are in the books of so many banks are part of a policy to force out smaller banks, and centralise banking into a few major international players. The toxic loans have also been used to transfer wealth away from much of the world population, and into the coffers of the wealthy banking elite.

It's not about being able to work as a complete commercial bank, it's about your vision and mission, these two things could help in realizing so much wealth even than some commercial banks. It's also good to point out that in some economic uncertainties of a country, banking and banking-related sectors are not always poor, especially this time when the interest rate is dangerously high in many countries.

Also, the bank issue in the US has caused a lot of misconception globally, it's not like that. Any country could have an issue in their sector, while other countries are booming in that sector. Taking my country as an example, banks are recording huger annual gains compared to the time without inflation issues. So, we should not use the US banking woes to judge globally, this is as the economy of the UK is even improving.

By the way, congratulations to you on the £100.

[Fiatless]

If the government restricts banks from giving loans to some institutions it might hurt the economy because it is not all businesses that fail to service their loans. The problem with most banks is that they go against government regulations and engage in countless financial malpractices. Recently a bank manager gave out an uncollateralized loan to his brother-in-law making which made the bank collapse. Because most of these top bankers are politically connected they are not persecuted. In my country most of these big companies and wealthy people that made banks collapse due to toxic loans are not openly mentioned. I think this secrecy portrays the fact that there is a collaboration between the government and these powerful debtors.

This is the first time I am learning about a bank like Nationwide that operates as if its customers are shareholders. It is also interesting to know that they abide fully by the banking laws. If all banks operate this way, there will be fewer bank failures.

[famososMuertos]

It is a very particular situation which could not only be reflected in the banking system, a few years ago I received or we (employees) got a bonus for over-productivity that one of the branches had had in another country, if I remember correctly it was the main branch located in United States.

I worked for this transnational in my country and this never happened again during the time I was there it, but there was the benefit that when any company in the consortium obtained an over in productivity, these profits were shared among all the employees globally, regardless of whether your branch was part of this achievement.

So, these policies exist but they are not applied correctly. Well, maybe they are applied but they are distributed among a few.

[tabas]

How I wish that my bank will also gives me that incentive.

This is the first time I am learning about a bank like Nationwide that operates as if its customers are shareholders. It is also interesting to know that they abide fully by the banking laws.

It's rare to see that a bank is like this. Most of the banks wouldn't care about their customers unless you're a big time depositor, loaner and good payer to them.

If all banks operate this way, there will be fewer bank failures.

It's not guaranteed that even other banks follow the same thing and procedure but, this is a desirable strategy for many banks that we use.

[flyingcarpet]

I've just been notified by my bank that they are paying me £100 under their fairer share policy. I'm with a UK "bank" called Nationwide. Well it isn't really a bank in the full sense of the word, but it provides a range of current accounts, savings account, and credit cards, and it offers mortgages. It is really categorised as a mutual building society, and the customers have an interest in the banks priofitability. It seems that they made so much money last year, that they are giving eligible customers a £100 payment. I don't have to do anything to receive this. I suspect that they were so profitable because there are government restrictions on the type of activities that they can undertake. For example, they can't lend money to foreign countries, or to businesses, and they can't indulge in the speculative financial instruments that havce bankrupted many of the true banks.

I believe that the abundance of toxic loans that are in the books of so many banks are part of a policy to force out smaller banks, and centralise banking into a few major international players. The toxic loans have also been used to transfer wealth away from much of the world population, and into the coffers of the wealthy banking elite.

Wow. It's been a long time since I've seen this kind of thing. In fact, the bank I work for charges an annual fee for using my credit card and can change this fee every year. While reading a topic like this, I tried to understand the level difference. Of course, this does not apply to everyone, but banks that see their customers only as people who make money should be replaced by such banks.

[uneng]

It's not everyday we see events like this. 100 Euros is a very decent sum of money to receive as a giveaway, even in UK. My first assumption would be that the bank is doing this as a marketing propaganda to attract more customers to their services. And it must be really an efficient one, because everyone would like to join a bank which gives their customers 100 Euros without any requirements in counterpart.

Once these news reach to more people in UK, I believe they are going to see their customers' base growing consistently...

[adaseb]

Here in Canada, Banks have these incentives from time to time. Last one I got was like $300 to just open a chequing account at a bank and leave a balance for 3 months and make a few bill payments. Other banks had similar offers. Generally they are from the big banks.

They do this because they pay crappy interest. I can put my savings in a money market and make 4-5% and do nothing and it’s risk free. So for some with a low balance it’s not a bad incentive but no point in moving the money back and forth this way.

[Jet Cash]

The Nationwide is one of the few building societies left in the UK. Building societies are a bit like the US savings and loan companies. They were created to help people save up and buy houses. You lent money to the society whilst you were saving, and they lent the money to house buyers so that they could pay interest. The government imposed quite a few restrictions on them, and this was intended to protect savers. For example, they cannot open accounts for businesses, or lend to commercial enterprises. Initially they didn't offer banking services, but with the arrival of computers, they started to introduce some bank facilities. They aren't members of the bank clearing association, so they have to clear cheques through a clearing bank, but that isn't a problem for most people. They offer the faster payments service, and this allows me to pay up to £100,000 to another UK bank account, and the money clears in under 1 minute. There is no charge for this transfer. I was originally a member of the Portman building society, and about 25 years ago that was bought by the Nationwide. As depositors are members, I got a cash payment for that, and I have been with the Nationwide ever since.Many of the other building societies were bought by clearing banks, and they lost their status as a result. For example The Halifax ( the largest at the time ) was bought by Lloyds Bank.
There are some other benefits as well. For example, I pay for my hosting and domain renewals in US dollars, and I don't pay a transaction fee for these international payments on my credit card. The exchange rate is very competitive as well. Another unusual payment that I don't understand is cash back on my debit card. I was rewarded with £10 per month for using my debit card instead of my credit card to make payments for groceries in some of the largest supermarkets. This only lasted for 3 months, and it must have been funded by the supermarkets. Still it was another £30 I picked up for no additional effort. I know these amounts are small, but they do mount up. The 3 payments I have mentioned in this forum - £50+£30+£100, are already at £180, and that is just in 3 months.

I have friends who belittle me for bothering with these amounts, and some of them throw away small coins as annoyances. One of them couldn't afford his electricity payment last winter ( he is on a prepayment system), and had to sit at home in the dark with a blanket over him. He doesn't seem to realise that small savings mount up, and can make quite a difference to your quality of life.

[davis196]

Some banks are managed quite well, while other banks are managed in a corrupt and incompetent way. We can't put all banks in one category.
Repeating "banks are bad, crypto is good" is one of the few things that annoys me about Bitcoin/crypto maximalism. The commercial banks aren't all bad, the central banks with their money printing machines are the ones, who are ruining the financial sector.
Saying that banks are bad, only because they are centralized is also a bit delusional. The crypto exchanges are also centralized. There are multiple examples of centralized entities being successful.

[irhact]

It seems that they made so much money last year, that they are giving eligible customers a £100 payment. I don't have to do anything to receive this. I suspect that they were so profitable because there are government restrictions on the type of activities that they can undertake.

That's very true, not all banks are going to burst and that's because they're not doing the things this other banks that have collapse has been doing. They make use of customers savings without letting the customers knowledge and when they come to collect their money the banks begin to give excuses or say they don't have money. If banks stay true to the services that they are suppose to be rendering they won't collapse.

I hope they'll continue paying the £100 because when they stop they'll also be criticize as the other banks. New businesses loves giving out bonuses that they can't keep up. This might just be a marketing strategy by your bank to get new customers but I hope it last.

[DrBeer]

I've just been notified by my bank that they are paying me £100 under their fairer share policy. I'm with a UK "bank" called Nationwide. Well it isn't really a bank in the full sense of the word, but it provides a range of current accounts, savings account, and credit cards, and it offers mortgages. It is really categorised as a mutual building society, and the customers have an interest in the banks priofitability. It seems that they made so much money last year, that they are giving eligible customers a £100 payment. I don't have to do anything to receive this. I suspect that they were so profitable because there are government restrictions on the type of activities that they can undertake. For example, they can't lend money to foreign countries, or to businesses, and they can't indulge in the speculative financial instruments that havce bankrupted many of the true banks.

I believe that the abundance of toxic loans that are in the books of so many banks are part of a policy to force out smaller banks, and centralise banking into a few major international players. The toxic loans have also been used to transfer wealth away from much of the world population, and into the coffers of the wealthy banking elite.

Many banks in my country also make interesting offers to their customers. And that's okay.
For example, for the IT sector, free issuance and maintenance of Visa Platinum class cards, but with a full range of additional services, which is very beneficial.
Also, many banks have programs for the return of funds from any purchases made with a card. It can be from 0.5% to 10% depending on the type of services / services paid by the card. For example:
Medicine / medications - 2%
Clothing - 2.25%
Food - 1%
Cinemas - 10%
Taxi - 5%

For the year, the amount of the refund is significantly more than the specified 100 euros.

[BIT-BENDER]

If the government restricts banks from giving loans to some institutions it might hurt the economy because it is not all businesses that fail to service their loans.

The government did not completely restrict loan if you read the post well you would have seen the restrictions was giving load to institution and businesses outside the region with in this case is UK. Actually it may seem unfair to people outside their region but it's very much going to help institution and business inside the UK.

Also on the other hand the government are restricting the amount of financial Bodies that has the freedom to give out loans outside the country, I think it is a plot to be able to centralize the system and be able to have full control of it,  but such banks in the op context would not even mind those restrictions going by their name NATIONWIDE I believe their target is with in the nation and they must have been successful at that.

[Mr. Magkaisa]

I've just been notified by my bank that they are paying me £100 under their fairer share policy. I'm with a UK "bank" called Nationwide. Well it isn't really a bank in the full sense of the word, but it provides a range of current accounts, savings account, and credit cards, and it offers mortgages. It is really categorised as a mutual building society, and the customers have an interest in the banks priofitability. It seems that they made so much money last year, that they are giving eligible customers a £100 payment. I don't have to do anything to receive this. I suspect that they were so profitable because there are government restrictions on the type of activities that they can undertake. For example, they can't lend money to foreign countries, or to businesses, and they can't indulge in the speculative financial instruments that havce bankrupted many of the true banks.

I believe that the abundance of toxic loans that are in the books of so many banks are part of a policy to force out smaller banks, and centralise banking into a few major international players. The toxic loans have also been used to transfer wealth away from much of the world population, and into the coffers of the wealthy banking elite.

      -   When did you start there mate? Are there any requirements given to the mutual building society you are talking about? Did you take any money out there? then how many times did you receive that amount?

That seems okay after all, then it seems like you're doing nothing, you're just waiting for the month to end and then you'll receive something again? It seems that there is something similar here in our country, but later our government closed it down, gave a disease order and the founder was also at large. But they seem to be a little bit different from other things.

[kryptqnick]

I think it's really nice if a bank or something bank-like is giving customers a bonus payment because they had a good year. I'm not sure that the restrictions are what made some banks profitable, but then again, it's possible. At least there can be a correlation there. It may be unexpected to people from other countries, but Ukrainian banks are doing really well now, during the war. For example, in January 2023, 90% of Ukrainian banks made the highest revenue since the start of the full-scale war, but also, the banking sector accumulated reserves in 2022 which are 35x higher than in 2021. Financial restrictions were also introduced because of the martial law. I don't think there's a strong case for a causal link here, but it's an interesting correlation.

[Iadegbola34]

It's actually a great news that your bank, Nationwide, is rewarding eligible customers with a £100 payment under their fairer share policy. As a mutual building society, Nationwide operates differently from traditional banks, with customers having an interest in its profitability. It's interesting to note that their profitability may be attributed to the government restrictions on certain activities, which prevent them from engaging in risky lending practices.

Your perspective on the abundance of toxic loans in the banking industry and its impact on smaller banks and wealth distribution is thought-provoking. While it's true that the financial crisis revealed significant issues with toxic loans and their effect on the global economy, it's important to note that regulatory measures have been implemented to mitigate such risks and promote stability in the banking sector.

The banking landscape continues to evolve, with a focus on stricter regulations and transparency. However, it's worth considering diverse viewpoints and engaging in constructive discussions to foster a more inclusive and equitable financial system.

[Jet Cash]

I think the payment was a one off gesture.
The restrictions on the Nationwide are for it to provide a service to personal investors. They can't lend to businesses or corporatuiions. Although having said that, I intoduced the owner of the local pub to the Portman ( the society that was taken over by the Nationwide), and he used it for the pub account, but this was because he was a soile trader, and it was in his name.

I'm a bit of a cynic, and I'm not sure that the payment was a wholly altruistic act. The UK government is scratchung around for extra things to tax. Energy companies and some othersare always being considered for "windfall" taxes. It may be that the Nationwide felt that giving its members a bonus may take it off the radar for a windfall tax. Of course it may just be that they are nice people running the society.

[YUriy1991]

This means that the performance of the bank that you said was very good for that year. So, it's only natural to get a profit sharing of £100 from the bank, also supported by the value of the savings. Of course, the story of providing services to private investors is a different story.

Well, My view is that why small banks leave is not entirely caused by toxic loans, but this involves many complex factors, including market dynamics, government policies, the economic conditions of the relevant banks which are considered to have made the wrong decision. For example in the case of lending that is not on target on a large scale which is seen as not meeting the target after their internal audit and it could also be unforeseen economic factors.

[Adbitco]

This is impressive but on the other hand if you look at it very well you will understand that they are as well doing marketing to attract more customers, especially since you said they don't operate as bank but to me they have intention to starts operating as bank. This actions was to call more attention to their customers and to continue storing and saving their funds under their custody and same time deciding to make some free giveaway to their costumes for more visibility.

Typical example of what they did is you posting about them here, same way too others could post them on their preferred platform and this would stair up those around that country and same region to starting making use of them. Do you now see why I said they are doing that to gain more visibility?
That is a good strategies to do their promotion and gain more popularity.

[disconnectme]

There is no way all banks will go burst, remember some of these banks are well-managed and there are some with too-big-to-fail status though they are all greedy bastards. The good ones and well-capitalized ones will swallow the bad ones and close to bankruptcy banks, this is not peculiar to banks but all businesses, just look at the number of businesses that have folded up since last year and we are still counting. The strong ones will remain and the weak ones will die this is how human being survived over the centuries