NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Tain, Scotland

The chart below shows the number of NatWest reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Tain, Scotland and surrounding areas. An outage is declared when the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line.

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:

• 
  JoeRoot𓃵 (@NO_1TestBatter) reported 1 minute ago

  @temporary_sw6y Right taking down this post bcz i checked from Espn & it hasn’t mentioned it as bilateral but as Natwest series so got confused.

• 
  Matthew Dodd (@1doddy83) reported 3 minutes ago

  @CoachDebs_spa lol NatWest are ****. If it wasn’t for my DD they would be gone. Most high street banks now are ******* useless. You can’t do anything with your own money without handing over your inside leg measurement

• 
  Ali@Makely (@MakelyStudio) reported 10 minutes ago

  the thing AI has never once been able to do is walk into a room, understand the real problem before anyone's articulated it, and make a call that changes the direction of the product. I've done that at Sky, Virgin Media, NatWest and Citibank. that's still the job. and it always will be.

• 
  jackduk (@jackduk1) reported 13 minutes ago

  @DebtFreeBy30UK I'm no expert, but it might make sense to pay minimum on your cards, throw everything at Monzo, then MBNA, Barclays then NatWest. Don't bother investing with this much debt. Squeeze some out of your weekly spend, even 30 quid a week will help. Move debt around to 0% early.

• 
  Funmi (@Funminz) reported 13 minutes 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.

• 
  Joseph Benjamin (@TheEcomLad) reported 14 minutes ago

  @FullyLV @Nugennath It’s not the same service though. My business partner had Coutts and was unhappy and switched to NatWest Premier. Myself, always had NatWest Premier and it’s been great overall. Have Barclays Premier too, but not many benefits compared to NW.

• 
  Phony Bliar (@phoneybliar) reported 16 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.

• 
  Chris Owen (@cwo1983) reported 17 minutes ago

  @tescomobile Upgraded in Feb 2026 with ZERO issues + NatWest Direct Debits paid monthly since July 2023. Yet @TescoMobile blames ME after their IT corrupted my file back to an old Lloyds record?! Blaming customers for internal database rollbacks violates UK GDPR Art 5(1)(d). Embarrassing.

• 
  Ali@Makely (@MakelyStudio) reported 18 minutes ago

  I've designed products used by 50M+ people across Sky, Virgin Media, NatWest and Citibank. AI didn't make that experience less valuable. it made the gap between good judgment and no judgment impossible to ignore. here's what's actually changed in 2026...

• 
  Magic hat 🎩 (@themagic_tophat) reported 19 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.