The £9bn gamble: Savers are tempted by promises of 25% but end up with just pounds By Dan Hyde Cautious savers who have been lured into gambling their money on fiendishly complicated stock market investments have lost out on thousands of pounds due to poor performance and sales commission, Money Mail can reveal. Greedy bank salesmen used slick patter to push customers" life savings into dud "structured product" investments. They boasted the money would be protected - and still produce a bigger return than an ordinary savings account. Wager: The situation will likely worsen as those who took a five and a half year deals in late 2007 and early 2008 start to get their money back. But in many cases, woeful performance has left savers with little more than their original money back. A saver who invested £40,000 at the beginning of 2008 will in some cases get a return of just £300, according to Money Mail estimates. By contrast, a five-year fixed-rate savings bond would have returned £10,954 after tax. Justin Modray, founder of advice website Candid Money says: "Banks have been selling poor-value structured products at a rate of knots for years - often to people who would be far better off with a simple savings account - and the shameful legacy is now coming home to roost." It is a bitter pill for tens of thousands who put more than £9 billion in risky deals as the credit crunch raged between 2007 and 2009. Many were panicked by plunging stock markets, or the threat of losing their life savings in a bank failure. They were tempted by promises of the potential for juicy returns coupled with savings safety. One deal sold in Lloyds branches advertised returns of up to 24.5 per cent over three and a half years, which would have turned a typical £40,000 lump sum in these products into £49,800. Yet customers have received just 1.4 per cent - or £560. While savers have suffered, banks have pocketed huge 5 per cent commissions for selling these deals. This instantly lops £2,000 off £40,000 invested, with hundreds more taken in charges every year. Money Mail been deluged with letters from savers shocked by the appalling growth of their funds. They say the deals were promoted as "no risk," accompanied by sturdy-sounding names such as Capital Protected Fund or Guaranteed Growth Plan. Advisers got away with this because the original sum was protected, even if stock markets crashed. Yet in reality no investment is risk free. Bafflingly complex structured products come with plenty of risks. Many have to hit a target every year or the saver's pot of cash fails to grow at all. This is usually linked to the performance of the FTSE-100, which means yo-yo-ing stock markets can leave the money growing at a snail's pace. The danger is this rate is slower than alternatives such as cash savings accounts. And if inflation takes off, the eventual nest egg may even buy less than it did to start with. The waters are muddied further because structured products make a series of bets on stock markets - via so-called derivatives trading - to try to guarantee the original capital back. Patrick Connolly, a financial adviser at AWD Chase de Vere, says: "Structured products are often pitched at cautious investors, but carry far more risk than a savings account: they have high charges and if you only get your money back at the end, you could be much worse off." Isaiah Johnson, 78, has suffered badly from investing in "structured products." Mr Johnson, from Washington, Tyne and Wear, pictured with his wife Gladys, 76, invested £20,000 from a house sale in the Scottish Widows Capital Protected Fund in late 2007. At the end of January this year, the couple had £20,233 - a return of just 1.2 per cent for five years. The bank charged £1,000 for its advice and Mr Johnson says: "To charge that much and get such a disappointing result was unbelievable." One customer, who wished to remain anonymous, trusted Lloyds TSB with a £150,000 inheritance when his parents died in May 2009. He and his wife, both 67, were reluctant to invest in shares with the financial crisis in full swing. Their adviser took a whopping £7,650 commission for recommending the Scottish Widows Protected Capital Solutions Fund - which tracked the FTSE-100 index until January this year. On the day he invested, the FTSE stood at 4,348; by the time the policy matured, it had risen to 6,181. This 42 per cent increase would have provided a return of £63,000 in a simple fund tracking the FTSE. But the actual payout was a risible 1.4 per cent, returning £2,172. Keith Robinson, 64, from Birmingham, was talked into investing £40,000 in a similar fund in September 2009. Although the stock market has risen 33 per cent since, his investment has grown to just £42,800. His £40,000 would be worth around £53,000 in a simple tracker fund. Mr Robinson says: "I was happy getting 4.5 per cent from a fixed-rate savings bond, but I was told I could get far more. I suspect the nice chunk they get for selling these products drove that advice. The situation will likely worsen as those who took a five and a half -year deals in late 2007 and early 2008 start to get their money back. Keith Spibey, from Southport, Lancashire, invested £10,000 in February 2008. With one month to go until the maturity date, his money is worth just £10,068. Another reader who asked not to be named invested £40,000 in a Scottish Widows Capital Protected Fund and Isa in June 2007. When the deal matured on January 6 this year, it had only grown by £269. Instead, she could have got £11,246 from a five-year fixed-rate savings bond paying 5.08 per cent a year after tax (6.35 per cent before) at Halifax, now owned by Lloyds. She says the bank took £5,580 in charges. The widow, from Warrington, Cheshire, adds: "It was a real shock, it quite upset me, and I felt misled." Those who question their return are being fobbed off. Robert Ewen, from Aberdeen in Scotland, invested £10,500 in the Scottish Widows Capital Protected Fund in 2005. When he queried why he received just £10,764 back, he claims that he was shouted at and left feeling "shaken." A spokesman for Scottish Widows says: "It was made clear to customers that their returns would be linked to the FTSE 100 and have the potential to provide a return on their original investment, subject to caps. However, if the FTSE were to fall, the original investment would be protected. Money Mail would like to hear from anybody sold a structured product. Contact Money Mail, Northcliffe House, 2 Derry Street, London, W8 5TT, or email d.hyde@dailymail.co.uk