Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Savings and Investments thread
Comments
-
Perhaps we might reframe... consider UK PLC as an investment proposition! I have certainly reduced exposure to US/ S&P 500 earlier this year with a switch to UK and Europe. And many of us live here, bringing up kids as well as dealing with creaking travel and health systems.redman said:
There would be a danger of turning this into a political thread which everybody wants to avoid. However this can't be let go. If you really believe some of the comments and implications in this, then I am very disapointed and thought you had a higher level of grasp. If you wish to take this debate further you can pm me.seriously_red said:
Total number of days lost to strike action under the Tories in both 2022 and 2023 = 2.5M whereas that figure is now down to 50,000 per month under LabourSantaClaus said:golfaddick said:
There has been a spike in inflation this year partly driven by the train drivers & doctors getting big pay rises as soon as Labour came in last July.Carter said:
I don't think that argument about low paid workers being paid an actual living wage causing inflation is without merit. What it means in reality though is some people will pull in a bit less money but a lot of people all of a sudden might have some more to spend on stuff that stimulates economies, holidays, cars, clothes, computers.cantersaddick said:
Which is what we are told will happen. But we've had ridiculous levels of inflation at the same time as wage suppression so many times in the last 50 years. The wage price spiral is a theory that gets wheeled out every time working people want higher wages but has literally never been bourne out in empirical evidence.golfaddick said:
Unfortunately that would lead to higher inflation, which would lead to higher interest rates, which would mean higher mortgage payments.....and for those that rent (which are a lot of the lower paid) will mean higher rents as landlords who have BTL mortgages increase the rent.Diebythesword said:
Sure, and the answer to that is to try and get them to a point where they are being paid more for what they do. That’s (provably, as it’s currently the case) not done by suppressing the wages of everyone else.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
I think a lot of people would think it was a lot. There are plenty of people doing valuable jobs who get paid peanuts because society doesn't value their roles - they'd love to get a decent wage.Diebythesword said:
The point is it’s no longer a “privileged group”. £100k a year in London isn’t a lot. You can have highly specialised relatively junior roles popping into £100k territory. I want people to earn as much as they can so the tax man can take as much as they can without hurting productivity. The 65% tax trap doesn’t do either.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
First World problem. Privileged group moaning about their lot and expecting sympathy.Huskaris said:First read about "Henry's" in a great article in The Economist, Standard have done a good article below. I find this area and this group of people fascinating.
https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/henrys-high-earners-not-rich-yet-london-struggling-b1238642.html
If this is the biggest problem in your life you don't have too much to worry about.
No easy answer I'm afraid. Average income is around £32k pa so anyone affected by the reduction in the PA is earning 3x the average.
And it will get worse. Taxes need to rise. No idea where Rachel Reeves will go to next but I suspect it wont be from the low paid.
I'll say it again if average wages increased with purchasing power since 1980 it would be £85k. If the higher rate of income tax threshold had risen with inflation it would be £162k. We have a low pay problem in the UK.
It's not an arguement its fact.
That was an interesting juncture. Sterling fell immediately after those payouts and the governments borrowing costs rose. I don't think Reeves or the government have ever really recovered from that smack of fiscal reality.
GDP growth 2019-24 under the Tories 3% or 0.6% PA... mid August will see the ONS release for June / Q2 2025 which is likely to show growth under Labour at around 1.2% - that's double the last Gov't.
BoE base rate was 5.25% but now 4.25% and tipped to come down twice more this year. That impacts mortgage holders, Gov't debt costs and the business environment.
Pay rises at 5% have outstripped inflation leading to more household income, a higher tax take and perhaps a reduction in benefits? Certainly the increase in the minimum wage should be felt on the high street.
It's incredibly hard to discern what happens next but one outcome is that this Labour Gov't trades through the various headwinds as rates come down, GDP growth continues AND increased tax receipts associated with both growth and freezing various allowances.
With such a massive majority in Parliament, one would hope for a far bigger impact on NHS waiting lists, failing water companies, electricity generation and planning etc. Time will tell whether the various deals with India, Europe etc and various ideas will make a tangible difference over the next year. We should at least hope that the BoE end quantitative tightening and perhaps even consider QE later in this cycle because our country needs massive investment in infrastructure, health and education, not to mention the housing stock.
Therefore the Gov't should be able to afford the latest NATO commitments, not least because billions spent on housing asylum seekers under the last government is rapidly reducing with far more asylum cases processed as well as rejected appelants being deported.
In a few weeks time we will see the ONS numbers for Q2 GDP growth which completes a full year under this government. There are known challenges across the board, a budget coming up in the autumn and a definite trend for interest rates to fall. This isn't about politics so much as macro... BoE rates are certainly coming down, wages are outstripping inflation, but household consumption is somewhat flat.
Aggregate demand relies upon growth in business, gov't and household as well as FDI & exports. It remains to be seen as to whether our service economy will grow at 1.2%+ PA over the foreseeable. And given that there's no currency risk, this feels like a decent hold for me right now!0 -
I've always preferred "labour value of that commodity". It was good enough for Adam Smith and strips out rentier type stuff.
But what's more important is why we've ended up here. We might then have a chance of turning it around.
25 years of cheap money inflated assets and left wages in the dust. Made asset holders richer, reduced the incentive to take business risks to improve productivity and instead leverage up and live off rents. That in turn led to a very poor allocation of capital chasing ever lower returns. Thousands who would have invested in businesses were now landlords
We don't have cheap money any more but it's taken years for firms to work off that debt. Households still have a way to go and governments are getting worse.
Then you have mass importation of cheap labour that has suppressed wages and reduces the incentives to automate.
But the Yanks have much of that and still have doubled their average wage compared to us in real terms. Partly because they still take risks but also, they have a lot less red tape, a lower tax burden, and, except briefly, no interference in market pricing like energy caps and green subsidies inflating the price of energy.
And then everyone wonders why we haven't had productivity increases in that same time period and why we all feel poorer.
Time to bring back another ghost from the 1970s, capital controls, or an exit tax, as they're now calling it. That's the answer!2 -
I absolutely hate with a passion Andrew Tate, but this clip about Gary's Economics actually did tickle me and find I agreed with about half of it! Not just me who thinks he's on the pay role!
https://youtube.com/shorts/butoZ1YG3jw?si=1e4snddZhCuuPNLC
0 -
You're a lot better than that.Rob7Lee said:I absolutely hate with a passion Andrew Tate, but this clip about Gary's Economics actually did tickle me and find I agreed with about half of it! Not just me who thinks he's on the pay role!
https://youtube.com/shorts/butoZ1YG3jw?si=1e4snddZhCuuPNLC4 -
Stranger things have happened (but no, I don't really believe he's on the pay role).Friend Or Defoe said:
You're a lot better than that.Rob7Lee said:I absolutely hate with a passion Andrew Tate, but this clip about Gary's Economics actually did tickle me and find I agreed with about half of it! Not just me who thinks he's on the pay role!
https://youtube.com/shorts/butoZ1YG3jw?si=1e4snddZhCuuPNLC0 -
If I get close to being way out come mid-Dec I'll just call my mate Donald and ask him to do something wacky that will send the markets into oblivion 😄WishIdStayedinthePub said:
Welcome to the relegation zone, Golfie.golfaddick said:
Didn't even look at the other guesses. I simply went with sequential numbering. 9....10....1(1).Rob7Lee said:golfaddick said:To relieve the tension on here I'll put in my guess for the FTSE100 at the end of December........
9101
The one we've been waiting for
obviously rates wishidstayedinthepub who chose the same!
Good enough reason than any other.3 -
"I've just spoken to my friend Golfie, very nice guy, he's doing a great job over there. We spoke about a lot of things, like the Luton defence. They have being doing a terrible job over there, it's a shame really, and now they've gone to his team, it's sad, very sad. Foreign music! I don't know a lot about foreign music, have you heard it? But anyway it sounds like it was loud, we've got to get that stopped, it can't keep happening anymore. Today, I'm announcing 300% tariffs on the UK effective immediately until they stop that music and move the Luton defenders back to Luton, it's got to stop, it should have stopped a long time ago, it's unfair and it's gone on for too long, it would never have happened if I was President in the UK, I shouldn't even be having to do this"golfaddick said:
If I get close to being way out come mid-Dec I'll just call my mate Donald and ask him to do something wacky that will send the markets into oblivion 😄WishIdStayedinthePub said:
Welcome to the relegation zone, Golfie.golfaddick said:
Didn't even look at the other guesses. I simply went with sequential numbering. 9....10....1(1).Rob7Lee said:golfaddick said:To relieve the tension on here I'll put in my guess for the FTSE100 at the end of December........
9101
The one we've been waiting for obviously rates wishidstayedinthepub who chose the same!
Good enough reason than any other.12 -
Wouldn't that also stifle investment into the country?WishIdStayedinthePub said:
Time to bring back another ghost from the 1970s, capital controls, or an exit tax, as they're now calling it. That's the answer!1 -
All the waffle ans statistics quoted above re average salary seems to ignore the actual reality. A person on average salary has a higher standard of living than someone in the 1970's (evidence holidays, cars, household appliances, clothes).
It's a bit like the quote an ex boss of mine used to quote "works in theory but will it work in practice"2 -
Rob7Lee said:
Depends on the definition of better, certainly easier to see someone with minor ailments, the few times I or family have been unwell out there the chemist usually prescribes something but never had anything major to be fair so don't know about operations and the like. I've given up with NHS GP's in this country, my wife this week tried to see a GP as injured her hand at school on Friday, finally got through today and has been offered an appointment on the 7th August and told if more urgent go to A&E.LargeAddick said:
As well as better weather you’d get better healthcare too from what our friends there tell us.Rob7Lee said:
Good article, I always look at these things predominantly with what I know personally or have first hand experience in, I know people who own companies that would fall into this type of wealth tax. One (of many!) of the difficulties I have is 1. how do you value a private company? and 2. Just because someone has a company worth say £35m (however that is derived) doesn't mean the company has £500,000 PER ANNUM to pay a 2% tax above £10m.Diebythesword said:Excellent analysis of why a wealth tax simply wouldn’t work:
https://taxpolicy.org.uk/2025/07/22/uk-wealth-tax-anti-growth/
That's very different to say someone who has £35m of gold, that value per troy ounce is set and you could sell some to pay the 2%, you can't really sell a bit of a private company to pay a wealth tax.
I don't imagine a wealth tax will be introduced in this country in the short term, although it's not like in the past the government are against doing stupid things!Retirement in Cyprus is looking ever more appealing!
Jokes aside I think it's certainly more considered now than 20 years ago, one of my friends recently moved/retired early to the IoM and is becoming a resident/tax resident, not solely for tax reasons but it was certainly a contributing factor. A maximum 21% tax rate (there's an allowance and a 10% rate) and no IHT. I think there's an overall tax cap as well, but not sure what that is, he mentioned something about it being over a 5 year period that he was applying for. Not sure I could live in the IoM though!
Spent a few days on the Isle of Man last week. What's not to like ?
1 - Sponsored links:
-
@Chaz Hill NSFW Please!2
-
The Government have now released their update regarding IHT on Pension pots after their consultations with the industry. No major changes & they confirm that they still intend it to come into force in April 2027.
Interestingly they forecast the revenue from this will raise £640 million in 27/28, £1,340 million in 28/29 and £1,460 million in 29/30. This will affect around 38,500 Estates in 27/28 with the average IHT increase being around £34k
The big change however is that reporting of any IHT will be down to to the Estate's representatives and NOT the pension companies as was their original idea. So it seems the pension companies have had their input & told the Government to sod off.
So, good luck to all the Trustees & beneficiaries who will have to go round collecting all the pension info & calculating any Tax due. Hope the Government think it's worth it for a measly extra £1.5 bn a year.2 -
golfaddick said:The Government have now released their update regarding IHT on Pension pots after their consultations with the industry. No major changes & they confirm that they still intend it to come into force in April 2027.
Interestingly they forecast the revenue from this will raise £640 million in 27/28, £1,340 million in 28/29 and £1,460 million in 29/30. This will affect around 38,500 Estates in 27/28 with the average IHT increase being around £34k
The big change however is that reporting of any IHT will be down to to the Estate's representatives and NOT the pension companies as was their original idea. So it seems the pension companies have had their input & told the Government to sod off.
So, good luck to all the Trustees & beneficiaries who will have to go round collecting all the pension info & calculating any Tax due. Hope the Government think it's worth it for a measly extra £1.5 bn a year.
The administration of it is one thing, but the principle of pension pots being included in the estate is absolutely correct in my opinion. It's an asset of the deceased and I'm not sure why it was ever excluded.6 -
Anyone else getting adverts by Richard Branson and others asking you to invest £200 and you will make thousands.
Surely a scam.0 -
blackpool72 said:Anyone else getting adverts by Richard Branson and others asking you to invest £200 and you will make thousands.
Surely a scam.Yes, a scam.https://www.which.co.uk/news/article/which-exposed-a-global-ai-scam-quantum-ai-a6E3T4Y5WHVc
2 -
I agree. Took my pension out of Barclays when I retired (after 36 years), primarily because it gave me freedom I just wouldn’t have had staying in the bank scheme (mix of DB and DC). It also meant that, as a single man, I had the ability to gift the pension to my sister, nephew & niece upon my death. It would have simply reverted to the bank if I had stayed in the scheme.bobmunro said:golfaddick said:The Government have now released their update regarding IHT on Pension pots after their consultations with the industry. No major changes & they confirm that they still intend it to come into force in April 2027.
Interestingly they forecast the revenue from this will raise £640 million in 27/28, £1,340 million in 28/29 and £1,460 million in 29/30. This will affect around 38,500 Estates in 27/28 with the average IHT increase being around £34k
The big change however is that reporting of any IHT will be down to to the Estate's representatives and NOT the pension companies as was their original idea. So it seems the pension companies have had their input & told the Government to sod off.
So, good luck to all the Trustees & beneficiaries who will have to go round collecting all the pension info & calculating any Tax due. Hope the Government think it's worth it for a measly extra £1.5 bn a year.
The administration of it is one thing, but the principle of pension pots being included in the estate is absolutely correct in my opinion. It's an asset of the deceased and I'm not sure why it was ever excluded.Had a few people ask if I am not pi$$ed off with what Labour have done now. Absolutely not. My family will still benefit in a way never before possible and, hopefully, quite significantly. I’ve no issue with it now included for tax in the estate.I am a bit puzzled by the pension companies not simply reporting direct to HMRC and releasing the net pension to the estate. Seemed a simple process. That said, hopefully it means they can’t use it as an excuse to raise more fees 😉1 -
Cheers Bobbobmunro said:blackpool72 said:Anyone else getting adverts by Richard Branson and others asking you to invest £200 and you will make thousands.
Surely a scam.Yes, a scam.https://www.which.co.uk/news/article/which-exposed-a-global-ai-scam-quantum-ai-a6E3T4Y5WHVc0 -
Sorry to repeat, IHT is an absolute piss take, raking money off people who have worked hard and have already been taxed on that money so they can invest and arrange their own finances and not live off the state. I have never claimed a penny in my life but paid plenty in.6
-
Disagree. Why should some one who’s done fuck all to get wealthy get it just because they were born to the right person? Make your own money.red10 said:Sorry to repeat, IHT is an absolute piss take, raking money off people who have worked hard and have already been taxed on that money so they can invest and arrange their own finances and not live off the state. Never claimed a penny in my life but paid plenty in.6 -
Which I have done, no kids anything left will go to charity, a lot of family's do not have money as I said its already been heavily taxed so why do they get to tax it twice and then piss it up the wall on some quango or such like.Diebythesword said:
Disagree. Why should some one who’s done fuck all to get wealthy get it just because they were bReallyorn to the right person? Make your own money.red10 said:Sorry to repeat, IHT is an absolute piss take, raking money off people who have worked hard and have already been taxed on that money so they can invest and arrange their own finances and not live off the state. Never claimed a penny in my life but paid plenty in.
3 - Sponsored links:
-
Diebythesword said:
Disagree. Why should some one who’s done fuck all to get wealthy get it just because they were born to the right person? Make your own money.red10 said:Sorry to repeat, IHT is an absolute piss take, raking money off people who have worked hard and have already been taxed on that money so they can invest and arrange their own finances and not live off the state. Never claimed a penny in my life but paid plenty in.Spot on. The Fabian Society sum it up nicely:‘Looked at in this light, the idea that a large gratuitous receipt should
not be taxed seems absurd: It would mean that the person who works,
gives up leisure, and contributes to economic life must share in society’s
collective burdens, while the person who gains a windfall without
doing anything need not.’Leave it to charity (no IHT) or gift it early to your kids when they need it most. Or spend it! If none of those then taxing it is appropriate.
5 -
Isn’t this the same thing though?bobmunro said:Diebythesword said:
Disagree. Why should some one who’s done fuck all to get wealthy get it just because they were born to the right person? Make your own money.red10 said:Sorry to repeat, IHT is an absolute piss take, raking money off people who have worked hard and have already been taxed on that money so they can invest and arrange their own finances and not live off the state. Never claimed a penny in my life but paid plenty in.Spot on. The Fabian Society sum it up nicely:‘Looked at in this light, the idea that a large gratuitous receipt should
not be taxed seems absurd: It would mean that the person who works,
gives up leisure, and contributes to economic life must share in society’s
collective burdens, while the person who gains a windfall without
doing anything need not.’Leave it to charity (no IHT) or gift it early to your kids when they need it most. Or spend it! If none of those then taxing it is appropriate.
On the one hand advocating you shouldn’t inherit tax free but it’s ok to gift tax free?
IHT can be harsh I think we all agree but excluding pensions from the pot doesn’t really make sense.0 -
valleynick66 said:
Isn’t this the same thing though?bobmunro said:Diebythesword said:
Disagree. Why should some one who’s done fuck all to get wealthy get it just because they were born to the right person? Make your own money.red10 said:Sorry to repeat, IHT is an absolute piss take, raking money off people who have worked hard and have already been taxed on that money so they can invest and arrange their own finances and not live off the state. Never claimed a penny in my life but paid plenty in.Spot on. The Fabian Society sum it up nicely:‘Looked at in this light, the idea that a large gratuitous receipt should
not be taxed seems absurd: It would mean that the person who works,
gives up leisure, and contributes to economic life must share in society’s
collective burdens, while the person who gains a windfall without
doing anything need not.’Leave it to charity (no IHT) or gift it early to your kids when they need it most. Or spend it! If none of those then taxing it is appropriate.
On the one hand advocating you shouldn’t inherit tax free but it’s ok to gift tax free?
IHT can be harsh I think we all agree but excluding pensions from the pot doesn’t really make sense.
As long as the benefactor lives for another seven years then some gifts to your children (when they are starting out on life's journey) are fine with me - that's part of parenting. The benefactor still has to live so it's likely to be a relatively small percentage of net wealth. Parents can already leave up to £1 million to their kids without there being any IHT - anything more then I'm fine with it being taxed.2 -
Exactly this. I stand to lose a pretty significant sum to this change as my dad structured his and my mums plan around being able to pass on pension pots tax free. He's pretty annoyed about it but I'm honestly fine with it. £1m even between 4 of us is enough tax free. Happy to contribute to a better society from the rest. To be honest at the stage of life I'm likely to receive it given my parents age and health I'm not gonna need it so will likely skip it straight on to the next generation or charity. Unless somethings gone massively wrong with the life plan.bobmunro said:valleynick66 said:
Isn’t this the same thing though?bobmunro said:Diebythesword said:
Disagree. Why should some one who’s done fuck all to get wealthy get it just because they were born to the right person? Make your own money.red10 said:Sorry to repeat, IHT is an absolute piss take, raking money off people who have worked hard and have already been taxed on that money so they can invest and arrange their own finances and not live off the state. Never claimed a penny in my life but paid plenty in.Spot on. The Fabian Society sum it up nicely:‘Looked at in this light, the idea that a large gratuitous receipt should
not be taxed seems absurd: It would mean that the person who works,
gives up leisure, and contributes to economic life must share in society’s
collective burdens, while the person who gains a windfall without
doing anything need not.’Leave it to charity (no IHT) or gift it early to your kids when they need it most. Or spend it! If none of those then taxing it is appropriate.
On the one hand advocating you shouldn’t inherit tax free but it’s ok to gift tax free?
IHT can be harsh I think we all agree but excluding pensions from the pot doesn’t really make sense.
As long as the benefactor lives for another seven years then some gifts to your children (when they are starting out on life's journey) are fine with me - that's part of parenting. The benefactor still has to live so it's likely to be a relatively small percentage of net wealth. Parents can already leave up to £1 million to their kids without there being any IHT - anything more then I'm fine with it being taxed.1 -
I’m not disagreeing with you by the way.bobmunro said:valleynick66 said:
Isn’t this the same thing though?bobmunro said:Diebythesword said:
Disagree. Why should some one who’s done fuck all to get wealthy get it just because they were born to the right person? Make your own money.red10 said:Sorry to repeat, IHT is an absolute piss take, raking money off people who have worked hard and have already been taxed on that money so they can invest and arrange their own finances and not live off the state. Never claimed a penny in my life but paid plenty in.Spot on. The Fabian Society sum it up nicely:‘Looked at in this light, the idea that a large gratuitous receipt should
not be taxed seems absurd: It would mean that the person who works,
gives up leisure, and contributes to economic life must share in society’s
collective burdens, while the person who gains a windfall without
doing anything need not.’Leave it to charity (no IHT) or gift it early to your kids when they need it most. Or spend it! If none of those then taxing it is appropriate.
On the one hand advocating you shouldn’t inherit tax free but it’s ok to gift tax free?
IHT can be harsh I think we all agree but excluding pensions from the pot doesn’t really make sense.
As long as the benefactor lives for another seven years then some gifts to your children (when they are starting out on life's journey) are fine with me - that's part of parenting. The benefactor still has to live so it's likely to be a relatively small percentage of net wealth. Parents can already leave up to £1 million to their kids without there being any IHT - anything more then I'm fine with it being taxed.The question is arguably at what level IHT should kick in. Is £1m right or too generous?
What is a threshold for ‘done f***all’ to kick in ?
It’s very subjective of course but when it’s not inflation linked it does feel somewhat an arbitrary figure currently.0 -
That's one view but I don't believe it's the whole picture. Luxuries like you list have got cheaper for sure. The one people always say is the "TV used to be 10 months savings now its one tenth of a months savings". But the flip side is necessities (food, housing costs, bills, travel costs) are taking up a higher proportion of income than ever before.redman said:All the waffle ans statistics quoted above re average salary seems to ignore the actual reality. A person on average salary has a higher standard of living than someone in the 1970's (evidence holidays, cars, household appliances, clothes).
It's a bit like the quote an ex boss of mine used to quote "works in theory but will it work in practice"0 -
…and the cost of a pint!cantersaddick said:
That's one view but I don't believe it's the whole picture. Luxuries like you list have got cheaper for sure. The one people always say is the "TV used to be 10 months savings now its one tenth of a months savings". But the flip side is necessities (food, housing costs, bills, travel costs) are taking up a higher proportion of income than ever before.redman said:All the waffle ans statistics quoted above re average salary seems to ignore the actual reality. A person on average salary has a higher standard of living than someone in the 1970's (evidence holidays, cars, household appliances, clothes).
It's a bit like the quote an ex boss of mine used to quote "works in theory but will it work in practice"2 -
I can see both sides on the pension IHT, normally agree with Bob on this sort of thing (especially the spend it, 100%!) and whilst although it has changed my tax planning i'm ok with it, especially as the pension has been tax free to build. Just can be annoying when you make certain plans and then the goal posts get moved considerably. However some people lose parents very young, before they are able to hand it down and for them the tax is payable partly due to the earlier deaths.
You then have the north south property divide, my sister lives in a huge house in Nottingham (about 6,600 sq ft), value, at a push is £650k. She and her civil partner will be fine to keep under the £1m. My house (about half the size) is currently likely £1.25m ish, so bar trading down will be almost impossible to keep under the £1m for my wife and I.
I've certainly learnt as I age it's very difficult to predict when your time is to come, and due to that it's almost a certainty that we'll leave some pension cash behind, hopefully very little!
I've never been IHT's biggest fan, i'd rather it was removed completely and the extra collected via income (and other) tax as we go through life, but that's not likely to happen any time soon.
I'll take a view in a few years time as to what suits us best, but one things for sure, i'm going to have a damn good old go at spending as much as I humanly can and giving away ample to hopefully leave the tax man a big fat nothing! Ideally I croak it (or likely will be my wife after me) leaving as near to £1m as possible. There's options for that, all will mean moving home, either somewhere else in the Uk or abroad (or most likely a combination of both). I currently quite like the idea of a London flat we can lock up and leave plus a place in the sun.........1 -
can we all just get back to posting what we got in the monthly premium bonds draw as this is all completely above my head.2
-
Patience, still 10 days to go until the next draw!northstandsteve said:can we all just get back to posting what we got in the monthly premium bonds draw as this is all completely above my head.2
