Savings compensation limit goes up.

With interest rates so low it's not very often that savers get good news but the increase in the savings compensation scheme limits from £50,000 to £85,000 from December 31st is to be welcomed.

This means that if a bank or building society goes bust in most cases savers will be eligible for up to £85,000 in compensation from the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (and up to £170,000 is protected if it's held in a joint account). I say 'in most cases' because there are some non UK banks that are members of their own country's compensation scheme which may pay slightly different amounts.

Not only is the compensation limit rising but there are other improvements as well. Payouts will be faster with many receiving compensation within seven working days. Those who can't be compensated within seven days will get their money within 20 days.

And if you have both a mortgage (or other debt) and savings with the same bank or building society and it fails, you'll now recieve your savings compensation in full. Previously the amount you owed would have been deducted from your savings first. It wasn't exactly fair - it's not likely you'd have been planning to pay off your mortgage in one fell swoop - and it would have undoubtedly been a bit of a shock for those savers who were also borrowers.

So, with all that good news there has to be some bad news, right? There is. What hasn't been changed by the Financial Services Authority is the basis on which the compensation limits apply. So these new, higher limits don't necessarily mean you can have £85,000 in a bank or building society and be protected by the compensation scheme, they only mean that you can have up to £85,000 in a bank or group of banks depending on how they're authorised by the FSA.

So, to take an example, NatWest, which merged with RBS some time ago has its own banking licence, as does RBS. This means if you have savings with NatWest and RBS you're protected for up to £85,000 in each bank. However, Halifax, which merged with Bank of Scotland around a decade ago, share a banking licence. That means the £85,000 limit applies to savings in both the Halifax and the Bank of Scotland.

In fact, Bank of Scotland's authorisation also covers Birmingham Midshires, Saga, the AA and Intelligent Finance so your £85,000 limit would be split between accounts you had with any or all of these organisations.

And in another change, whereas savers with building societies that had merged in the last couple of years had dual protection (they could claim up to £50,000 from each building society), that has now been reduced. The new limit - post December 31st - is £85,000 spread between the building societies that have merged. Confused? You're not the only one.

The changes to the compensation scheme do mean that banks and building societies now have to tell customers how they are authorised and whether they are part of a larger group (worryingly until the start of this year it was information that could be pretty hard to come by) but I don't think that's good enough.

For savers to have confidence in the compensation scheme it needs to be easy to understand and easy to explain. At the moment - despite the recent improvements - our own savings compensation scheme is neither.

The complexity of savings accounts

A few days ago I wrote an article about finding a fixed rate savings account with a competitive rate of interest. Not rocket science, you'd have thought - but it's certainly not that straightforward either.

For a start, some price comparison websites are fond of listing 'best sellers' or 'sponsored products' above the best buys and they don't always compare like with like (some websites exclude deals that come with short term bonus rates while others don't etc). The upshot is that you have to take the time to look at two or three different price comparison sites to be sure of getting the best deal.

Next you have to look at the catches - are you tied into taking out a bank account or investment product with the bank or building society in question? For example, Santander has one year bond paying 4.5%, which is head and shoulders above the rest. Look a little closer and you'll see that you have to invest the same amount as you put into the bond into a 'qualifying investment product'.

It might be the case that Santander's investment is the right one for you, but you shouldn't take out an investment product on the basis of a good rate on a linked savings account - not unless you've checked out the investment product thoroughly.

But it's not just the conditions and catches that you have to watch out for - there's the issue of safety as well. After the shock of the credit crisis most of us a bit a wary about chasing the highest rate without knowing how our savings are protected but finding out how you might be compensated should the bank fail isn't exactly straightforward either. I was trying to cut the explanation down to a couple of short sentences, but it was a struggle.

There is one set of rules for banks based or operating in the UK, another for those headquartered in the EEA, which means that banks based in the EEA can top up so that they offer the same level of protection as banks based in the UK if they want to but they don't have to.

And what about banks in the UK that are owned by the same parent company? Well, in some cases they may share a banking licence with the parent company in others they may not and the amount of your savings that are protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme are linked to the way the bank is licensed, not its brand name(your savings are covered up to a limit of £50,000 per banking licence).

I appreciate that banks and building societies will want to compete with each other for market share and that the savings safety scheme was put together when the banking landscape was far simpler. But the fact is that many people feel - understandably - bewildered about making what should be a relatively straightforward decision.

Financial services companies often bemoan the fact that people in the UK aren't very engaged with their finances - particularly long term savings. Perhaps it would be easier if the process of picking a savings account wasn't so complicated.