£100 in current account, £100 in pot is £200 however you look at it.
Spend £150, but keep £100 in pot is still £250
Can’t have it both ways.
What’s the difference to monzo if I have £0 in my main balance and £50 in a pot, compared to my main balance being at -£150 and a pot with £200?
Because at the end of the day my overall account value is the same in each. Monzo still holds same amount of my money, and my account on the whole is in the black.
lol the difference is you don’t get charged interest on your overdraft if you have 0 in your current account 
I’m not sure about those calculations.
If you have £200 in your account AND pot(s) and spend £150, then you have £50 left, regardless of location (account or pot)(s))?
2 Likes
From what I can gather from the majority of replies, most folk seem to want to keep their “pots” segregated from their main account when it works in their favour, but want them integrated when it doesn’t.
7 Likes
In your account or your main balance?
I think it’s only fair that it should be the overall account balance that’s taken into account.
Anyway for what it’s worth I do see your point of view, I wouldn’t want a negative main balance while having money in pots, but I feel that if I or anyone else did they shouldn’t be charged until the whole account is in the red.
I don’t think I can add anything more to the discussion, it’s been good talking it out.
3 Likes
That was very civil Stuart and I can understand your logic 
4 Likes
Excellent debate.
Yes, we all have different opinions and who can say which opinion is right or wrong…
But I have thoroughly enjoyed listening to all the arguments for and against, and hopefully have made a reasonable contribution myself.
2 Likes
If that was a reply to me Trevor I apologise if you found my response patronising it wasn’t intended to be
Except you can, as we’ve already established, at another bank. That means it’s not a question of ‘simple maths’ as you’d have us believe, but accounting.
3 Likes
Or UX. I don’t believe the decision was made with the Monzo execs sitting there rubbing their hands with glee at all the stupid people that are going to be spending more in their overdraft. I believe it was a clarity and UX decision first and foremost as that is how Monzo have shown to approach most elements of the app.
But in the end its ending up how it often does in these starling vs monzo discussions. Fanlings are more focussed on the accounting and getting the best monetary deal whilst Fanzo’s seem to regularly prefer the user experience and clarity. It’s been shown a few times with different features from what Ive seen, with savings pots and the original overdraft rates as a couple of easy examples. Different strokes for different folks and luckily there is the option to bank with either (or both). I wouldn’t want to change how Monzo does it personally, I think having options is important!
4 Likes
Lot of interesting views so far.
I would again take a step back and look at what is lending interest. (I am not a professional economist, but here goes my best try)
Lending interest = liquidity/source cost (interest) + lending costs + lending margin + risk based interest (related to colletaral and monthly earnings, credit score of person taking the loan).
If you want to buy a house, the banks will happily loan you for 2-3% interest/year. Why? Their source cost is almost 0%, there is just a very slight risk for them, because generally even if the worst happens they will be able to sell of the house and recoup the whole mortgage amount, so the 2-3% covers their profits and the slight risk.
Now, with payday loans, obviously people who constantly struggle to have money at the end of the month are very risky, and probably don’t have a house or any valuable possessions to repay if the worst happens. So that’s why the 34% lending rate is reasonable. Practically one in four such people can totally default and not pay back a penny, yet the bank is still winning, because the other 3 repay.
Now, about pots and negative balances: for anyone who argues why Monzo overdrafts (covered by pots, so with an above 0 net balance) should be working like my second example, I really don’t think it’s valid…
Pots are at minimum colletaral, but even more: they put your net position above 0. So it’s still that “the bank owes you”. If the bank owes you (net), they should not be entitled to interest.
In programming, this is very simple, pseudo code:
Function CalculateDailyInterest
netBalance = sum(pots) + mainBalance
If netBalance < 0
Charge 34%/365 rate on -netBalance
Else
Nothing
End
If we only count pots as “colleteral”, then the second part (Nothing) would be replaced by a very small number, eg. 0.1%/365 interest.
1 Like
Except that to spend it it needs to be transferred into the main balance, at which point it’s reduced.
£-50 main balance with a £200 pot balance (£150 account balance) becomes £50 main balance with a £100 pot balance (still £150 account balance) when you move £100.
you can pay DDs from a pot , I wonder if this goes through your current account before being paid ? 
It does, you see it in your feed
2 Likes
Basically the bill pot is at MVP stage it just automates the transfer of funds from a pot to the main account to the same value as the direct debit.
1 Like
yes Im starting to conflate Starlings way of doing things and Monzo …Monzo dont allow you a negative balance without paying for it … I dont know if Starling facilitate a DD payment from a goal ??
I’m pretty sure that this is done to ensure everything is recorded on the main feed. I don’t expect that to change anything soon unless there’s a philosophy shift in this area at Monzo.
(Just my observations and assumptions though so not guaranteed to be correct)
1 Like
Sorry but this is the sort of thing that drives me mad this day and age. Take responsibility for running your account, know what you owe, what you are spending on and when you need to move money over. It’s always someone else’s fault but in reality majority of people are spending their money on rubbish then complain they have none, then they say it’s the banks fault for you breaking the clear rules for using money that isn’t yours.
it’s the banks fault for you breaking the clear rules for using money that isn’t yours.
The money is mine though, that’s literally the whole point of this. 
5 Likes