NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of NatWest reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by NatWest users through our website.

• Website (37%)
• Mobile App (32%)
• Transactions (11%)
• Login (11%)
• Transfer (11%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent NatWest outage reports came from the following cities: Plymouth, Buckingham, Milton Keynes, Manchester, Maidstone, London, Dunfermline, Leicester, Newcastle upon Tyne, and Stalybridge.

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Plymouth	Mobile App	15 hours ago
Buckingham	Login	16 hours ago
Milton Keynes	Transfer	14 days ago
Manchester	Website	1 month ago
Maidstone	Website	2 months ago
London	Mobile App	2 months ago

Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

NatWest Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Ian Darbyshire (@Ian_darbyshire) reported 6 minutes ago

  @stevemiddi1 @ArturNadol7566 @LloydsBank I have the internal Natwest interest forecasts and they were all going down at that time.

• 
  Magic hat 🎩 (@themagic_tophat) reported 9 minutes ago

  @BlueCityBrain Was going to do a post on it soon. I very much doubt an initial decision is still pending. For context, NatWest Markets plc v Bilta (UK) Ltd [2021] was ordered a retrial when its decision was still waiting after 19 months at the High Court. Chancellor of the High Court absolutely blasted it. He said decisions like these should need a good reason to take over 3 months in the courts and if they do, they get closely monitored. For it to take this long in private arbitration when there’s a requirement in the rules for a decision as soon as practicable… and the arbitrators have been working on other cases… totally inexcusable if it weren’t already out. Career enders. A hearing on sanctions and final award should be quick too. So no excuses. Only 2 possibilities I see: 1) Final Award is coming imminently. By end of July. 2) They have it but they’re waiting for the end of the World Cup (they shouldn’t be and could open themselves up to damages) 3) City launched an appeal after the decision on liability was issued and before the hearing on Sanctions

• 
  NoOrdinaryFamily (@BooksFromNOF) reported 10 minutes ago

  Don't you just love it when your @NatWest account gets locked for a second time in a week and you can't access your money? The second I get back to the UK, that account is getting binned. ******* useless.

• 
  Phony Bliar (@phoneybliar) reported 12 minutes ago

  @guinevere_86157 19% is high by historical standards, and compares favourably with other Retail Banks e.g. RBS was down at 4% before the financial crisis, and NatWest is currently 14%. The economic impact of 30% should also be considered as this is capital that can't be used to support lending.

• 
  Sumanyu Sharma 🍫 (@sumanyu) reported 13 minutes ago

  @ElevenLabs @LDNTechWeek @CosineAI launches Lumen Sovereign, Britain's first sovereign frontier model. Co-designed with BT, Lloyds, NatWest, LSEG, PwC, BAE Systems, Leonardo UK, Babcock, Thales UK, and Telefónica Tech UK&I. Runs entirely inside customer infrastructure with no external data transfer.

• 
  LiveSquawk (@LiveSquawk) reported 19 minutes ago

  NatWest H1 2026 Earnings - Q2 Pretax Oper Profit GBP 2.29B (est 2.01B) - H1 Impairment Charge Of £280 M, Prev Y/Y £226 M - Keeps Ordinary *** Around 50% Attributable Profit - Sees 2026 ROTE +19% - Still Sees 2028 ROTE Above +18% - Still Sees 2028 Customer Assets And Liabilities Rising +4% From End 2025

• 
  B (@brobertson2010) reported 19 minutes ago

  Are banks in the UK experiencing issues? Friends are struggling to transfer (business and personal accounts) @BBCNews @SkyNews Down Detector is showing dozens of reports for Revolut, Monzo, Barclays, Nationwide, NatWest, PayPal etc.

• 
  Mr Brondor (@MrBrondorDeFi) reported 22 minutes ago

  🔮BRONDOR ANALYSIS - ethereum:0x4a220e6096b25eadb88358cb44068a3248254675 WILL MAKE A NEW WAVE OF MILLIONAIRES Everyone wants the next 100x memecoin Meanwhile the real money is hiding in the most boring chart in crypto Let me explain why $QNT is set up different and how it actually makes people rich next run THE SETUP NOBODY SEES 🧿 Quant has a max supply of 14.88 million tokens. Not billion. MILLION. For context most coins have billions in supply. QNT has less tokens than some people have Twitter followers. Low supply plus institutional demand equals violent price moves when capital flows in. THE CONTROVERSIAL PART Quant won’t 100x because of hype. It’ll moon because banks are forced to use it. ECB Digital Euro. HSBC. Barclays. Lloyds. NatWest. Bank of England. SWIFT integration. These aren’t partnerships for marketing G. These are live pilots going into production mid-2026. When tokenized deposits go live in the UK the demand for QNT to access Overledger isn’t optional. It’s structural. HOW IT MAKES MILLIONAIRES Here’s the math nobody runs: QNT did $428 ATH in 2021 on pure speculation with zero real adoption. Now it has actual bank integrations and sits at $81. If it just returns to ATH that’s a 5x from here. If institutional adoption pushes it past ATH into price discovery? That’s where generational wealth happens. 14.88M supply means it doesn’t take much capital to send it parabolic. THE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH Most people won’t hold it long enough. It’s boring. It moves sideways for months. It doesn’t pump on Twitter hype. It tests your patience until you capitulate right before the move. The millionaires won’t be the traders. They’ll be the ones who understood the thesis and sat on their hands while everyone called them stupid. Low supply. Real adoption. Institutional demand. Patience. That’s the recipe G Not financial advice but the setup is right there for anyone willing to see it DYOR Tribe -Brondor

• 
  Halal&Tayyib Organics 🍃 (@NaturezFynest) reported 22 minutes ago

  @grok Ofcourse not! Why would they leave an Internet trail. Bank of England funds Natwest, HSBC, Barclays etc. An overnight shut down of all their accounts for unproven allegations.... no link, yeah okay! 👍

• 
  S4mtheM4n (@M4nS4mthe) reported 22 minutes ago

  @THummell39837 I saw a photo of her drunk and haggard some years ago. What she earning off the taxpayers ? At least the NatWest CEO is working for his money at a bank ! Not sucking off the taxpayers of UK !!!!

• 
  Lorraine Morris (@MLorrM) reported 22 minutes ago

  In the case of Perks v NatWest Markets Plc (evidence given around 2022), Mr Neil Graham — a GRG director, chartered accountant and experienced banker — was cross-examined under oath about the bank’s RMP credit system entries for swap-related credit lines / contingent obligations (often referred to as CLU – Credit Line Utilisation). Key exchanges reported in the materials include: 🔹Mr Graham accepted that the credit-line entry on the RMP system represented the client’s contingent obligation. 🔹Mr Graham agreed it was a factor the bank used when considering in loan-to-value calculations for the overall connection. 🔹When asked whether it could push a connection over a loan-to-value ratio covenant, he answered (subject to market movements) yes. 🔹He further accepted that this could ultimately lead to the connection being transferred into GRG. 🔹Mr Graham is experienced and the testimony is truthful; however, as happened in Ireland - bank’s counsel later attempted to “distance the bank from this evidence in closing submissions”. 🔹Surprise, surprise but bank’s counsel is categorically misleading the Court. 🔹They characterised Graham’s answers as given “on the hoof,” - said it was not his specialist area and submitted that he was wrong on the LTV impact point. 🔹They argued the bank did not accept that the CLU had the effect claimed and that there was no duty to volunteer information about it to the customer. 🔹This was what bank counsel is required to do to keep the charade going and that they cavalierly do so is a scandal in itself. 🔹Mr Graham’s testimony exists and is on the public record, as circulated by campaigners and referenced in related presentations. 🔹So, a senior bank director & chartered accountant with a GRG/risk-adjacent role did accept under oath that the credit line could cause or contribute to an LTV breach and subsequent transfer into GRG. 🔹This is rather obvious and is in fact why the products were sold in the first instance - as confirmed by numerous insiders. 🔹NatWest’s formal position in that case (and more generally) has been to treat such lines as “internal risk measures” rather than customer-facing hard liabilities that automatically breach covenants in the way alleged, and to reject the broader fraud characterisation. But that would be their formal position would it not? When billions of euros is at stake? 🔹Meanwhile customers faced enormous break costs & this fact alone is wholly inconsistent with the characterisation of the credit line as a purely internal risk measure. 🔹It is however consistent with the reality, which is that the bank had booked (and later crystallised) an exposure against their customers and the credit line had been concealed. 🔹That bank counsel filed pleadings that falsely characterised these structures as just fixing an interest rate or just ordinary fixed-rate loans, facilitating the burying of the misrepresentations under layers of legal process - is a further scandal - akin to that whereby the lawyers who managed to lock up innocent sub-postmasters on foot of unsound evidence. 🔹The result for Irish SMEs duped by theses practices was a systematic extraction of value from those SMEs - while the guilty institution and its lawyers ensured that accountability remained permanently out of reach. @ArturNadol7566 @Wftproof

• 
  James Berkeley-Clarke (@JBerkeleyClarke) reported 34 minutes ago

  @Sargon_of_Akkad Probably an attack against sly news for harassing his family. Farage doesn't back down from a fight. Look at NatWest scandal he got the CEO fired! Watch what happens...

• 
  Magic hat 🎩 (@themagic_tophat) reported 35 minutes ago

  𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝟭𝟭𝟱 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻? I know a certain commentator on the case (who claims insider knowledge) asserts there’s been no decision as of 2 weeks ago. But I very much doubt an initial decision is still pending - I believe it’s been issued to parties. There’s no reason why we would hear if it had. Initial decisions have never been published or leaked prior to the Final Award before. Why do I think it’s been issued? Because it’s been more than 19 months since the hearing concluded. A delay as long as 19 months for an initial decision on liability would put the integrity of the decision at risk and would raise questions over the arbitrators’ intentions (did they delay on purpose to damage it). I just can’t see them having done that. For context, NatWest Markets plc v Bilta (UK) Ltd [2021] was ordered a retrial when its decision was still waiting after 19 months at the High Court. The Master of Rolls at the Court of Appeal absolutely blasted the delay. He said decisions like these should need a good reason to take over 3 months in the courts and if they do, they get closely monitored. For it to take this long in private arbitration when there’s a requirement in the rules for a decision as soon as practicable… and the arbitrators have been working on other cases… totally inexcusable if it weren’t already out. Career enders for the arbitrators. A hearing on sanctions and final award should be quick too. So no excuses. Only 3 possibilities I see: 1) Initial decision was already issued to parties and a Final Award is coming imminently. Before the season starts. 2) They have the Final Award already but they’re waiting for the end of the World Cup before publishing it (they shouldn’t do this and it could even open themselves up to damages if this were the case) 3) City launched an appeal after the decision on liability was issued but before the hearing on sanctions, thereby delaying a Final Award Number 3) would be novel (i.e., never done before) but the rules do not explicitly prohibit it. I’ve hypothesised it as a possibility for a while. If so, we might not hear anything until 2027. The longer it goes without a Final Award, the more likely I believe that’s what’s happened.

• 
  Jennifer Richards (@Jennife10651535) reported 37 minutes ago

  @CallMeMoNow That's such a shame. We had some very valuable advice from a neighbour who worked in the bereavement part of NatWest when Tony was doing his aged relatives' probate. Like everything else it's all gone to ****

• 
  Maurice Andrews (@maurice_an63983) reported 40 minutes ago

  @Neccccy No because he at the moment doesn't support HBOS Lloyds Banking Group Barclays RBS Natwest Unicredit Private Equity Vulture Funds serious criminal activities fraud forgery perjury false declaration to courts

• 
  MarketNewsFeed (@MarketNews_Feed) reported 41 minutes ago

  NATWEST H1 2026 EARNINGS - Q2 PRETAX OPER PROFIT GBP 2.29B (EST 2.01B) - H1 IMPAIRMENT CHARGE OF £280 M, PREV Y/Y £226 M - KEEPS ORDINARY *** AROUND 50% ATTRIBUTABLE PROFIT - SEES 2026 ROTE +19% - STILL SEES 2028 ROTE ABOVE +18% - STILL SEES 2028 CUSTOMER ASSETS AND LIABILITIES RISING +4% FROM END 2025 ...

• 
  Therealmrschampagne💋🌈🦄🥂 (@mrsevansbouchot) reported 43 minutes ago

  Anyone banking with @NatWestGroup BEWARE. I have been the victim of a major scam and NatWest have done NOTHING about it. I’ve only been a client for 40 years. An ABSOLUTE DISGRACE. Please share. And no help from @NatWest_Help. An utter JOKE.

• 
  Fordy (@Andyfor03298768) reported 43 minutes ago

  @NatwestB @TunnelGuruVPN NatWest bank Bedford, what a shower of ****. Me and my Mrs have banked with this lot for 30+ years and we cannot even take our own cash out in large amounts! Twice we had meetings totalling about 4 hours and they ask the same questions and we answer every one but still no cash.

• 
  Deborah 🇺🇦 (@deborah_hilliam) reported 44 minutes ago

  @MartinSLewis The BBC had a piece on their website yesterday about cheques from HMRC not scanning on the app and she had to go miles to pay it in. My elderly housebound mum had the same problem this year. My sister tried to scan and pay it but it wouldn’t work on the NatWest app.

• 
  ParteekNotPrateek (@randomcricfacts) reported 47 minutes ago

  @Weirdgripping84 159 gave him a good run but Natwest **** show should have been the end of him. The fact that Laxman also kept failing in 2002 is what helped pip it in Mongia’s favor coz he bowled.

• 
  Tom Hingley (@tomhingleymusic) reported 49 minutes ago

  delays on the M1 today as assistance vehicles with ‘abnormal load’ vehicles steer Nigel Farage’s wallet down from a private airport to London . There will be a 30 minute silence at noon to remember how the nasty NatWest stopped poor Nigel’s bank account lead by Nick Robinson

• 
  Rob W R 🇪🇺 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 (@Woollygar) reported 50 minutes ago

  @give_me_caffine Worked with a guy in NatWest 1980's who was asked if he was a Welsh speaker by a well healed female customer said 'no, I've forgotten it all' She shunned him. Told me after that use was beaten out of him in school so his parents stopped using it at home & he just stopped using it

• 
  Melvyn Newell (@melv66722) reported 55 minutes ago

  @Londonist @DCBMEP “…began in 1971. ..nine years to realise.” (Working closely with Seiferts from 1975, as PQS for the now the Sea Containers Hotel, I was told that the delay in the NatWest Tower was as a result of a redesign for the tower footprint to match the new NatWest logo).

• 
  Mark (@MTrad25) reported 58 minutes ago

  Friday 31 July — what’s moving The week ends with the cleanest illustration of the new rule anyone could ask for. Apple beat on almost everything. Revenue $109.4bn, +16%. iPhone $54.25bn, +22% — its best ever June quarter. EPS $2.02 against $1.89 expected. The stock fell after hours, on guidance. Amazon raised full-year capex to $220bn — a number that would have been punished a fortnight ago — and jumped ~8%, because AWS grew 36.7%, its fastest in over four years. Microsoft up, Meta down, Amazon up, Apple down. The market is neither rewarding AI spending nor punishing it. It’s grading proof. Note the casualty: for two weeks Apple was the hedge, capex at 1.8% of revenue making it the place to hide from spending anxiety. On the night the spenders got paid, abstaining stopped earning a premium. Asia took the same message and amplified it violently. The KOSPI rose as much as 17% — its best day on record. Samsung and SK Hynix up near 30%. Taiwan +7%, Nikkei +5%. Now the number that matters: the KOSPI is still down ~25% for July, its worst month since 1997. A 17% day inside that is not recovery. It’s a market with the leverage stripped out of it — Korean authorities spent the week reining in leveraged products that had wiped out retail savings. And the FX story is the week’s thesis in miniature. Japan and Korea intervened jointly on Thursday — unprecedented, with the yen near a 40-year low. Then the BoJ held rates on Friday and the yen went straight back to 160.69. Coordinated intervention by two states bought roughly one session. Nothing about the rate differential changed, so nothing about the yen did. Which rhymes with the central banks. The Fed’s statement was near-identical to June’s — one verb and three dissenters — and Warsh signalled a step back from forward guidance. The BoE held 3.75% on a 6-3 vote, three hawks where two were expected, then Bailey immediately told reporters not to read it as edging towards a hike. September hike odds fell to 40% from above 50%. The bond market’s answer: long-end US yields near 19-year highs while the short end eased. A steepener built on doubt that anyone can anchor inflation. In London: the FTSE 100 touched a record 10,979.60 intra-day then closed down 0.1%. Rolls-Royce led, +6%, on H1 operating profit up 17% to £2.42bn. Today: NatWest, Taylor Wimpey, ITV, plus Exxon and Chevron. FTSE futures +0.4%. This was the week guidance died. Warsh won’t give it. Bailey disowned his own committee’s. Two governments spent reserves defending currencies and got a day. And Apple’s forecast cost it more than a record quarter earned. Everyone is being marked on evidence now.

• 
  Vlad G (@realvladhere) reported 1 hour ago

  @pokemondealsuk NatWest no issues!

• 
  Vaibhav Tiwari (@vaibhavtiwari3) reported 1 hour ago

  @NatWest_Help @NatWest_Help I am in severe financial hardship. Gotogate conceded my £1,298 refund weeks ago, yet NatWest is holding my funds until June 7th. Ombudsman Case PNX-6001799-B1R6 is open. Why won't you provide provisional credit to a loyal customer in need?

• 
  X Finance Bull (@Xfinancebull) reported 1 hour ago

  🚨 $QNT holders, seven major UK banks are testing programmable bank money on infrastructure provided by Quant. Read those names again: Barclays. HSBC. Lloyds Banking Group. NatWest. Santander. Monzo. Nationwide. Led by UK Finance, the Great British Tokenised Deposit initiative is delivering live pilot transactions involving digital versions of normal sterling bank deposits. The easiest way to understand it is this: Your money remains bank money. But instead of sending it blindly and trusting every person in the process, rules can be attached before it moves. Payment releases when the buyer receives the product. Mortgage funds transfer when every document and condition is ready. Money and a tokenised asset settle together, so neither participant is left waiting and exposed. Quant’s Overledger provides the orchestration and interoperability connecting participating banks with RTGS, Faster Payments, Open Banking and tokenised-deposit platforms. That is why this matters more than another blockchain demonstration. The institutions are testing real financial activity across multiple banks, with fraud protection, settlement efficiency and programmability at the centre. GBTD also follows Quant’s involvement in the UK Regulated Liability Network, while its acceptance into the Bank of England Synchronisation Lab places the project beside the UK’s work on atomic central-bank-money settlement. Does this guarantee every bank will buy QNT? No. But it gives Quant institutional validation that most interoperability projects spend years trying to earn. If GBTD succeeds, the opportunity will extend far beyond one UK pilot. Other countries are also exploring tokenised deposits, digital securities and connected payment systems. QNT is sitting behind infrastructure the largest banks will need to make those separate systems work together. Many people will study QNT after adoption becomes obvious. I would rather understand why seven banks selected Quant before everyone else notices. My conviction in $QNT came before the headlines. Now the adoption is becoming impossible to ignore.

• 
  Funmi (@Funminz) reported 1 hour ago

  Joint borrowers earning £150,000+ can now borrow up to 6.5× their income. NatWest will lend at 6.5× for higher earners, but only if they’re borrowing 75% LTV or less. Pros Higher borrowing power — High income earners can access larger mortgages, which helps in expensive markets like London where property prices are high. More competitive offering — NatWest becomes more attractive to wealthy buyers who might otherwise go to specialist lenders. Useful for joint high earners — Couples earning £150k+ combined can stretch further to buy homes in premium areas. Potentially better rates — The article notes NatWest often has best buy rates, so borrowers may get both a high LTI and a good interest rate. Cons Higher financial risk — Borrowing 6.5x income is a big commitment. If interest rates rise or income drops, repayments can become stressful. Lower LTV allowed — To borrow at 6.5x, you must have at least a 25% deposit. That’s a huge barrier for many people. Only for high earners — This doesn’t help average income buyers struggling with affordability. It widens the gap between who can and can’t buy. Could push prices up — Allowing people to borrow more can fuel higher property prices, especially in already expensive areas. This move is good for wealthy buyers who want bigger loans, but it does nothing for regular earners and may even increase market pressure. It’s a strategic play by NatWest to attract high income clients, not a broad affordability solution.

• 
  Curious Gazelle (@CuriousGazelle) reported 1 hour ago

  @RenovatioFurius @OwenBenjamin One of my relatives in Pakistan does “Islamic” microfinance. Microfinance being loans for the poor. Their “legal system” allows them to scam a person with a banana stand in a slum. It’s more moral that a country allow NatWest for a working-class person to inflate their lifestyle.

• 
  Matthew Burrows (@MJBurrows) reported 1 hour ago

  Why is #NatWest down 4% today on a £2bn profit beat? When markets ditch a beat, they're pricing what the headline missed. Here's what you need to know.