Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Premium Bonds

Discussing offers, rates and deals on suppliers
Spet0789
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1913
Joined: June 21st, 2017, 12:02 am
Has thanked: 242 times
Been thanked: 952 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470464

Postby Spet0789 » January 5th, 2022, 1:17 pm

Lootman wrote:
torata wrote:
Lootman wrote:Since you cannot prove the fidelity of ERNIE than you should at least retain an open mind.

As for being a "waste of time", given the inevitably of you always replying, I sense you have plenty of it to waste.

You, however, can prove to yourself the fidelity (or lack of) of ERNIE.

No, I never said that. I merely stated that nobody can prove anything so we just have to trust.


That sort of epistemological nihilism is fine for post-modern pseudo-intellectual onanism.

We do know that there is no post-fact check that can “confirm” that a finite set of numbers is random. The sequence 123456789 may well be random. In fact with a large enough sample of such numbers it will come up.

Sensible folk apply Occam’s razor. If for many years, fully transparent and published tests for randomness carried out by an apparently independent body show that Ernie’s output is 99.999% or whatever random, that’s good enough for us and we move on with our lives.

Then we can focus our efforts on skeptically testing presumptions which are perhaps only 90% likely to be true and where there is an obvious incentive for someone to cheat.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470472

Postby Lootman » January 5th, 2022, 1:42 pm

Spet0789 wrote:
Lootman wrote:
torata wrote:You, however, can prove to yourself the fidelity (or lack of) of ERNIE.

No, I never said that. I merely stated that nobody can prove anything so we just have to trust.

That sort of epistemological nihilism is fine for post-modern pseudo-intellectual onanism.

We do know that there is no post-fact check that can “confirm” that a finite set of numbers is random. The sequence 123456789 may well be random. In fact with a large enough sample of such numbers it will come up.

Sensible folk apply Occam’s razor. If for many years, fully transparent and published tests for randomness carried out by an apparently independent body show that Ernie’s output is 99.999% or whatever random, that’s good enough for us and we move on with our lives.

Then we can focus our efforts on skeptically testing presumptions which are perhaps only 90% likely to be true and where there is an obvious incentive for someone to cheat.

Yes, it is reasonable to assume that if there was a hack, flaw or feature that made ERNIE less than 100% random then someone somewhere would have noticed. And by that "someone" I mean someone with the requisite advanced maths skills to determine that from the outputs from ERNIE that are made public.

And that is probably good enough for government work, as the saying goes. My point was limited to noting that I do not have the mathematical skills to determine randomness, nor the skills to know who does have those skills. Therefore my faith and trust in ERNIE has to be less than my faith and trust in other processes that are more public, better known to me, or both.

Spet0789
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1913
Joined: June 21st, 2017, 12:02 am
Has thanked: 242 times
Been thanked: 952 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470497

Postby Spet0789 » January 5th, 2022, 2:39 pm

Lootman wrote:
Spet0789 wrote:
Lootman wrote:No, I never said that. I merely stated that nobody can prove anything so we just have to trust.

That sort of epistemological nihilism is fine for post-modern pseudo-intellectual onanism.

We do know that there is no post-fact check that can “confirm” that a finite set of numbers is random. The sequence 123456789 may well be random. In fact with a large enough sample of such numbers it will come up.

Sensible folk apply Occam’s razor. If for many years, fully transparent and published tests for randomness carried out by an apparently independent body show that Ernie’s output is 99.999% or whatever random, that’s good enough for us and we move on with our lives.

Then we can focus our efforts on skeptically testing presumptions which are perhaps only 90% likely to be true and where there is an obvious incentive for someone to cheat.

Yes, it is reasonable to assume that if there was a hack, flaw or feature that made ERNIE less than 100% random then someone somewhere would have noticed. And by that "someone" I mean someone with the requisite advanced maths skills to determine that from the outputs from ERNIE that are made public.

And that is probably good enough for government work, as the saying goes. My point was limited to noting that I do not have the mathematical skills to determine randomness, nor the skills to know who does have those skills. Therefore my faith and trust in ERNIE has to be less than my faith and trust in other processes that are more public, better known to me, or both.


Ok, but you’re changing your position.

You said “no-one can prove anything”.

What you should have said is “I don’t have the skills to prove this point or to decide who to trust to prove it”.

There is a difference.

I do have the mathematical skills to prove (to my satisfaction) randomness. Have I applied them to the published ERNIE output? No. Because I also think I have the
skills to decide that the ONS is sufficiently trustworthy to do it for me, they do so with full transparency and they are not materially conflicted.

Lootman
The full Lemon
Posts: 18681
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 628 times
Been thanked: 6564 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470514

Postby Lootman » January 5th, 2022, 3:30 pm

Spet0789 wrote:
Lootman wrote:
Spet0789 wrote:That sort of epistemological nihilism is fine for post-modern pseudo-intellectual onanism.

We do know that there is no post-fact check that can “confirm” that a finite set of numbers is random. The sequence 123456789 may well be random. In fact with a large enough sample of such numbers it will come up.

Sensible folk apply Occam’s razor. If for many years, fully transparent and published tests for randomness carried out by an apparently independent body show that Ernie’s output is 99.999% or whatever random, that’s good enough for us and we move on with our lives.

Then we can focus our efforts on skeptically testing presumptions which are perhaps only 90% likely to be true and where there is an obvious incentive for someone to cheat.

Yes, it is reasonable to assume that if there was a hack, flaw or feature that made ERNIE less than 100% random then someone somewhere would have noticed. And by that "someone" I mean someone with the requisite advanced maths skills to determine that from the outputs from ERNIE that are made public.

And that is probably good enough for government work, as the saying goes. My point was limited to noting that I do not have the mathematical skills to determine randomness, nor the skills to know who does have those skills. Therefore my faith and trust in ERNIE has to be less than my faith and trust in other processes that are more public, better known to me, or both.

Ok, but you’re changing your position.

You said “no-one can prove anything”.

What you should have said is “I don’t have the skills to prove this point or to decide who to trust to prove it”.

There is a difference.

I do have the mathematical skills to prove (to my satisfaction) randomness. Have I applied them to the published ERNIE output? No. Because I also think I have the
skills to decide that the ONS is sufficiently trustworthy to do it for me, they do so with full transparency and they are not materially conflicted.

Somewhere between the two. My lack of maths skills means that I cannot know either way, hence my agnosticism on the topic. I did assume, perhaps wrongly, that nobody else here has that level of skill. Maybe you do, as claimed, but then I would have to have the same level of skill to know whether you really do or not.

In any event the person I was originally responding to has never written anything that indicates that he has those skills, so like me he must merely be trusting the words of others whom he believes do have those skills. Which takes us back to the idea of faith.

ERNIE is most likely random. I never claimed otherwise. Only that it would not shock me if some tweaks were programmed into the machine.

XFool
The full Lemon
Posts: 12636
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 2608 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470521

Postby XFool » January 5th, 2022, 3:59 pm

Lootman wrote:
Spet0789 wrote:I do have the mathematical skills to prove (to my satisfaction) randomness. Have I applied them to the published ERNIE output? No. Because I also think I have the skills to decide that the ONS is sufficiently trustworthy to do it for me, they do so with full transparency and they are not materially conflicted.

Somewhere between the two. My lack of maths skills means that I cannot know either way, hence my agnosticism on the topic. I did assume, perhaps wrongly, that nobody else here has that level of skill. Maybe you do, as claimed, but then I would have to have the same level of skill to know whether you really do or not.

In any event the person I was originally responding to has never written anything that indicates that he has those skills, so like me he must merely be trusting the words of others whom he believes do have those skills.

That person doesn't need to have those skills, because he sensibly realises other people do. It's their job. He also understands that is how the world works, so for instance, he doesn't spend his time worrying about whether there is or is not a china teapot in orbit beyond Mars or, if there is, whether it effects his Premium Bonds. If an astronomer were to announce the discovery of such an orbiting item of china tableware, the situation might change.

Lootman wrote:Which takes us back to the idea of faith.

I think "trust" is by far the better word. This isn't a matter of religion. Well, not for most of us...

Lootman wrote:ERNIE is most likely random. I never claimed otherwise. Only that it would not shock me if some tweaks were programmed into the machine.

Like that teapot? But you have never suggested any even slightly plausible reason for those invisible, notional "tweaks".

Why would the government rig the Premium Bond prize number generator? If, say, they want to pay out less prize money all they have to do is simply reduce the interest rate on the prize fund! Which they do - publicly.

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470528

Postby Bouleversee » January 5th, 2022, 4:15 pm

Don't you think this topic is perhaps exhausted? Can't you just wish each other a happy new year and move on?

Here's wishing you all a decent return from your PBs in 1922.

Bouleversee.

AleisterCrowley
Lemon Half
Posts: 6381
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:35 am
Has thanked: 1880 times
Been thanked: 2026 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470529

Postby AleisterCrowley » January 5th, 2022, 4:16 pm

A touch of Occam's razor, a bit of abductive reasoning, and a dollop of Latin (Cui bono?)
Premium Bonds are not rigged.

vrdiver
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2574
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 2:22 am
Has thanked: 552 times
Been thanked: 1212 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470541

Postby vrdiver » January 5th, 2022, 5:05 pm

AleisterCrowley wrote:Premium Bonds are not rigged.

As this is Pantomime season, I'm sure Lootie will respond "Oh yes they are!"
(Oh no he won't!)

The very best to all for 2022.

VRD

AleisterCrowley
Lemon Half
Posts: 6381
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:35 am
Has thanked: 1880 times
Been thanked: 2026 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470543

Postby AleisterCrowley » January 5th, 2022, 5:08 pm

It's behind you!

Happy New Year to all :D

Spet0789
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1913
Joined: June 21st, 2017, 12:02 am
Has thanked: 242 times
Been thanked: 952 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470546

Postby Spet0789 » January 5th, 2022, 5:18 pm

Bouleversee wrote:Don't you think this topic is perhaps exhausted? Can't you just wish each other a happy new year and move on?

Here's wishing you all a decent return from your PBs in 1922.

Bouleversee.


Happy New Year to you all!

Personally, I think a discussion about the nature of truth, mathematical tests for randomness and teasing Lootman about self-abuse is far more exciting than a thread which mainly seems to be posters reporting the results of a few draws from a large distribution! That tells us the square root of nothing.

chas49
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1935
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:25 am
Has thanked: 216 times
Been thanked: 457 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#470549

Postby chas49 » January 5th, 2022, 5:37 pm

Moderator Message:
All this discussion about whether or not someone can prove that ERNIE is or isn't rigged has moved too far off-topic for this thread and this board. Please do not continue this discussion here. Further posts on that off-topic area will be deleted without further warning. Thanks (chas49)

yorkshirelad1
Lemon Slice
Posts: 906
Joined: October 5th, 2018, 1:40 pm
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 299 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#471482

Postby yorkshirelad1 » January 8th, 2022, 10:59 pm

I was curious (and had to scratch an itch). lovemoney seem to publish PB prize winnings each month with some associated data including the date of purchase of the winning bond (e.g. https://www.lovemoney.com/news/13635/premium-bonds-winners-have-i-won). I was interested to do a bit of analysis. A bit of Googling led me to https://www.nsandi.com/prize-checker/winners and e.g. https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-january-2022.xlsx (other previous months XLS files are listed below*, I guessed them by a bit of trial and error; the data in this format/location/url seems to go back to June 2021). A bit of spreadsheeting gave me the graph below, which is all the prizes in the last 6 months (July 2021-Jan 2021 incl) grouped by the year of purchase of that winning bond. The graph is based on the data in the 6 spreadsheets below, so is prizes of £1000 and above, and 6 months data. Draw your own conclusions: YMMV!

Image

url (if no image above): https://imgur.com/ixMUDsG

As it happens, I have two old blocks (my record keeping of my prizes started in 2001):
  • a purchase July 1968 £300 block: prizes in 2004 (£50), 2005 (£50) and 2007 (£50 + £100). Curiously, since 2007 (i.e. for 13 years), nothing on that 1968 block.
  • a purchase in April 1980 block of £500: prizes in 2010 (£25), 2014 (£25), 2018 (£25), 2020 (£25 + £25). So it’s possible to have a 10 year dry period!
I’m very tempted (just for the hell of it), to cash that 1968 £300 block out and buy new and see what happens!


* other data sets:
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-august-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-september-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-october-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-november-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-december-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-january-2022.xlsx

CryptoPlankton
Lemon Slice
Posts: 786
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1544 times
Been thanked: 873 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#471493

Postby CryptoPlankton » January 9th, 2022, 2:42 am

yorkshirelad1 wrote:I was curious (and had to scratch an itch). lovemoney seem to publish PB prize winnings each month with some associated data including the date of purchase of the winning bond (e.g. https://www.lovemoney.com/news/13635/premium-bonds-winners-have-i-won). I was interested to do a bit of analysis. A bit of Googling led me to https://www.nsandi.com/prize-checker/winners and e.g. https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-january-2022.xlsx (other previous months XLS files are listed below*, I guessed them by a bit of trial and error; the data in this format/location/url seems to go back to June 2021). A bit of spreadsheeting gave me the graph below, which is all the prizes in the last 6 months (July 2021-Jan 2021 incl) grouped by the year of purchase of that winning bond. The graph is based on the data in the 6 spreadsheets below, so is prizes of £1000 and above, and 6 months data. Draw your own conclusions: YMMV!

Image

url (if no image above): https://imgur.com/ixMUDsG

As it happens, I have two old blocks (my record keeping of my prizes started in 2001):
  • a purchase July 1968 £300 block: prizes in 2004 (£50), 2005 (£50) and 2007 (£50 + £100). Curiously, since 2007 (i.e. for 13 years), nothing on that 1968 block.
  • a purchase in April 1980 block of £500: prizes in 2010 (£25), 2014 (£25), 2018 (£25), 2020 (£25 + £25). So it’s possible to have a 10 year dry period!
I’m very tempted (just for the hell of it), to cash that 1968 £300 block out and buy new and see what happens!


* other data sets:
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-august-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-september-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-october-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-november-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-december-2021.xlsx
https://www.nsandi.com/files/asset/xlsx/prize-january-2022.xlsx

There's really nothing surprising here. This article may help:
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/sav ... -ones.html

Given that only 2.7% of the bonds in the draw (that percentage will be even smaller now) were bought before the year 2000, you'd expect winning bonds of that age to be relatively scarce. At the time of the above article (last October), 36.9% had been bought since 1st January 2020. That figure will obviously be larger now. No wonder so many winning bonds are "new"!

Seriously, the only effect of selling old bonds just to buy new is to deprive oneself of the chance of being in the draw for a month.

Aljie
Posts: 6
Joined: June 22nd, 2020, 1:17 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Premium Bonds

#475140

Postby Aljie » January 21st, 2022, 4:59 pm

I believe this is my first ever post on the Forum, so it's a shame I don't have a more interesting question to pose. However ...

It's likely that I'll need to dip into my Premium Bonds on a regular basis this year to top up my income. Is it known which day of the month the draw takes place, so I can time my withdrawals for the days after?

I used to think the draw took place on the first of each month, but then some years ago, I sat next to NS&I's press officer at an industry dinner, and he divulged that the draw occurs some days earlier, to allow time to contact the main prizewinner before the announcement. But is it done on a known day?

Many thanks. Now I've dipped my toe in the water, hopefully I'll not be too embarrassed to return. Aljie

swill453
Lemon Half
Posts: 7962
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
Has thanked: 984 times
Been thanked: 3643 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#475143

Postby swill453 » January 21st, 2022, 5:05 pm

Aljie wrote:I used to think the draw took place on the first of each month, but then some years ago, I sat next to NS&I's press officer at an industry dinner, and he divulged that the draw occurs some days earlier, to allow time to contact the main prizewinner before the announcement. But is it done on a known day?

Welcome! I think it would be risky to sell bonds before the month end. Your number may get picked in the earlier draw, but there could be something in the small print that might invalidate your prize if you sell before 00:01 on the first day of the next month.

Scott.

ReformedCharacter
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3120
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:12 am
Has thanked: 3591 times
Been thanked: 1509 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#475157

Postby ReformedCharacter » January 21st, 2022, 5:41 pm

Aljie wrote:I believe this is my first ever post on the Forum, so it's a shame I don't have a more interesting question to pose. However ...

It's likely that I'll need to dip into my Premium Bonds on a regular basis this year to top up my income. Is it known which day of the month the draw takes place, so I can time my withdrawals for the days after?

I used to think the draw took place on the first of each month, but then some years ago, I sat next to NS&I's press officer at an industry dinner, and he divulged that the draw occurs some days earlier, to allow time to contact the main prizewinner before the announcement. But is it done on a known day?

Many thanks. Now I've dipped my toe in the water, hopefully I'll not be too embarrassed to return. Aljie

IIRC, when you sell the bonds they ask you - at some point - whether you want to sell now or after the next draw, they certainly used to do that.

RC

swill453
Lemon Half
Posts: 7962
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
Has thanked: 984 times
Been thanked: 3643 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#475160

Postby swill453 » January 21st, 2022, 5:46 pm

ReformedCharacter wrote:IIRC, when you sell the bonds they ask you - at some point - whether you want to sell now or after the next draw, they certainly used to do that.

Yes that's true, they do. I just checked back and last time I did that the money appeared in my account on the 4th of the next month, which was the 3rd working day.

Scott.

Aljie
Posts: 6
Joined: June 22nd, 2020, 1:17 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Premium Bonds

#475168

Postby Aljie » January 21st, 2022, 5:59 pm

Ah, thank you, well that makes the decision a whole lot simpler. I need to sell the first bonds in the next couple of weeks, so will come back and confirm that it's still the case. Good to have one dilemma taken off my hands.

Again, thank you. That was relatively painless for my first time on the board. Aljie.

yorkshirelad1
Lemon Slice
Posts: 906
Joined: October 5th, 2018, 1:40 pm
Has thanked: 176 times
Been thanked: 299 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#475726

Postby yorkshirelad1 » January 24th, 2022, 12:48 pm

Sunday Times, Sun 23 Jan 2022
Should I stop investing Premium Bond wins?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/our-scout-group-was-not-prepared-for-5k-fraud-5krw6tkgt (paywall, but free login)
(article noted is at the bottom of the above page)

Sunday Times wrote:Should I stop investing Premium Bond wins?

Recently I read that if you hold Premium Bonds to a value not far short of the £50,000 limit, and your prize money is automatically converted to new Premium Bonds, you risk losing your entitlement to a prize if a win takes you over the limit. Is that correct?

If so, would capping your holdings at £48,000 or £49,000 — and banking one’s winnings instead — be a wise precaution? Or would it make no difference in the case of a win in excess of one or two thousand pounds?

Jill replies

No, it’s not correct. When customers choose to have any Premium Bonds prizes automatically reinvested into more bonds, NS&I will reinvest prizes up to the £50,000 limit. But when the limit is reached, NS&I will pay you the balance. For example, if you had £49,990 in Premium Bonds and won a £25 prize, NS&I would top up your Premium Bonds by £10 to £50,000 and pay you the balance of £15.

Even if you do manage to breach the £50,000 limit, maybe because you have an old account from your childhood you didn’t know about, NS&I will contact you in writing directly, so it is completely unnecessary to cap your Premium Bond holdings below the maximum £50,000 and doing so could reduce your chances of winning.


Given that there was a story back in November about NS&I reclaiming Premium Bond prizes when they uncovered an ancient premium bond holding that had been forgotten about (below*) and therefore exceeded the £50k limit, I suggest the above Sunday Times item needs a bit of clarification... i.e. NS&I will write to you about breaching the limit, but they might also write to you to reclaim any related prizes!

*NS&I cancels prizes over 'forgotten' Premium Bonds; Daily Telepraph 27 Nov 2021
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/personal-banking/savings/nsi-rescinds-premium-bonds-prizes-due-decades-old-technicality/
(Previously posted on TLF)

kiloran
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4092
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:24 am
Has thanked: 3234 times
Been thanked: 2827 times

Re: Premium Bonds

#475745

Postby kiloran » January 24th, 2022, 1:24 pm

yorkshirelad1 wrote:Sunday Times, Sun 23 Jan 2022
Should I stop investing Premium Bond wins?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/our-scout-group-was-not-prepared-for-5k-fraud-5krw6tkgt (paywall, but free login)
(article noted is at the bottom of the above page)

Sunday Times wrote:Should I stop investing Premium Bond wins?

Recently I read that if you hold Premium Bonds to a value not far short of the £50,000 limit, and your prize money is automatically converted to new Premium Bonds, you risk losing your entitlement to a prize if a win takes you over the limit. Is that correct?

If so, would capping your holdings at £48,000 or £49,000 — and banking one’s winnings instead — be a wise precaution? Or would it make no difference in the case of a win in excess of one or two thousand pounds?

Jill replies

No, it’s not correct. When customers choose to have any Premium Bonds prizes automatically reinvested into more bonds, NS&I will reinvest prizes up to the £50,000 limit. But when the limit is reached, NS&I will pay you the balance. For example, if you had £49,990 in Premium Bonds and won a £25 prize, NS&I would top up your Premium Bonds by £10 to £50,000 and pay you the balance of £15.

Even if you do manage to breach the £50,000 limit, maybe because you have an old account from your childhood you didn’t know about, NS&I will contact you in writing directly, so it is completely unnecessary to cap your Premium Bond holdings below the maximum £50,000 and doing so could reduce your chances of winning.


Given that there was a story back in November about NS&I reclaiming Premium Bond prizes when they uncovered an ancient premium bond holding that had been forgotten about (below*) and therefore exceeded the £50k limit, I suggest the above Sunday Times item needs a bit of clarification... i.e. NS&I will write to you about breaching the limit, but they might also write to you to reclaim any related prizes!

*NS&I cancels prizes over 'forgotten' Premium Bonds; Daily Telepraph 27 Nov 2021
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/personal-banking/savings/nsi-rescinds-premium-bonds-prizes-due-decades-old-technicality/
(Previously posted on TLF)

That prompted a thought.......
I have a full holding bought a few years ago, but also have 2 bonds bought for me by my parents when Premium Bonds were first released. Never given it any thought. The 2 bonds are registered in my name at my current address.

--kiloran


Return to “Bank Accounts Savings & ISAs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests