NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Saxmundham, England

The chart below shows the number of NatWest reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Saxmundham, England 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:

• 
  lauren ୨୧ (@michellesdowden) reported 4 minutes ago

  natwest resolved my problem in my favour hahahahahaha shame @ booking . com

• 
  C B Campbel (@Tw0pAcPr0) reported 5 minutes ago

  @NatWest_Help dear natwest bot, your phone app has an issue. Unfortunately it doesn't know how many hours in a daily reset. Ive want to move funds but it keeps telling ive reached my daily amount. I moved money Sunday its now Tuesday.

• 
  Joe Smith (@IzriteAD) reported 6 minutes ago

  @peterjukes This was literally 3 years ago, the article states the short position was held since the spring of 2023 before the announcement that coutts closed his account. If Farage got the letter in June 2023 but they were already shorting NatWest, then this will be a non-issue.

• 
  Jobie (@JobieTwits) reported 7 minutes ago

  @johntierney73 @NnatMmac @NatWest I worked in fraud for a bank. It is possible. You gave your pin to someone or set it to something they could work out, and they had your card. There are other ways like they had access to your Internet banking which told them your pin but that’s less likely due to 2FA.

• 
  Lorraine Morris (@MLorrM) reported 9 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

• 
  ParteekNotPrateek (@randomcricfacts) reported 11 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.

• 
  Funmi (@Funminz) reported 12 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.

• 
  QuanChain (@Quan_Chain) reported 16 minutes ago

  Quantum readiness programs feel like progress. They aren't. NatWest and 10 others joined NQCC's QTAP cohort 3, awareness, not migration. Different problems. QuanChain's oracle-triggered key rotation solves the second in under 90 days, no protocol vote. Should regulators require migration proof, not just program enrollment, before 2028?

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

  10 years. 50M+ users. £11M+ revenue impact. Citibank. Mercedes. Sky. Virgin Media. NatWest. I spent a decade fixing conversion problems at companies most startups would kill to work with. what I learned: the same broken patterns show up everywhere - onboarding that loses people in the first 60 seconds, pricing pages that confuse instead of convert, signup flows with friction nobody ever fixed. now I build the same systems for funded startups.

• 
  Mohammed Azhar (@mdazhar1989) reported 20 minutes ago

  @suzuki2wheelers Hi, Our Access 125 had been given for service to Natwest Suzuki on Jun 4, and vehicle hasn't been returned back yet. The head of service is giving invalid reasons and keeps on delaying. Request to take immediate steps