NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Penrith, England

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

• 
  michelle maher (@mmaher70) reported 5 minutes ago

  Call yet again, to cut welfare when 14 million people are in poverty There was £40.5bn paid out in bonuses between May 2013 and April 2014 'NatWest, Barclays, Lloyds and Santander received more than £9 billion in interest on Bank of England reserves in 2023 – a 135% increase on the previous year' This is taxpayer's money At the same time welfare was cut by billions, and we were blamed for economic problems UK #disabilitybenefits #Burnham

• 
  Chris Owen (@cwo1983) reported 6 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.

• 
  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.

• 
  Mighty Mo (@mh379) reported 14 minutes ago

  @BasilTheGreat I’ll say this again: if you want to peacefully bring down the institutions profiting from the migrant crisis, hit them where it hurts, organise withdrawals from the banks. Natwest, Barclays, HSBC, Lloys, Santander to name a few Ask supporters to withdraw their money (even small amounts) from the big banks tied to government policy. The system is fragile, they don’t hold enough cash for everyone to withdraw at once. This is show hurt more than violent riots, it's how you apply real pressure wthout people getting jailed. National strike next, road blocks bring the country to its knees Fill the streets up and down the country demanding a GE and secure borders. Our ancestors didn’t fight for this. Enough.

• 
  jackduk (@jackduk1) reported 15 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.

• 
  AFRICA IS HOME GLOBAL (@AfricaisHOME2) reported 24 minutes ago

  Chancellor John Healey has declined to rule out a higher tax on banks in his first budget under Prime Minister Andy Burnham, due on October 28. In letters to cabinet ministers this week, Healey said there was no new money available for spending commitments and that all announcements must be funded from within existing budgets, while also warning that Britain’s rising welfare bill must be controlled. He did not explicitly target banks, but the Treasury is under pressure after the TUC called for higher levies on the sector to help fund energy bill relief, and after a year of strong profits. Barclays reported half year profits up 17 percent to 6.1 billion pounds, Lloyds up 23 percent to 4.3 billion pounds and NatWest also up 20 percent to 4.3 billion pounds, figures that make lenders an obvious target for a cash strapped chancellor looking to meet fiscal rules. The debate comes as Burnham settles into Downing Street and sticks to the borrowing rules inherited from Rachel Reeves, requiring day to day spending to be matched by revenue within three years. Healey and Burnham have written that each department has a responsibility to manage within its budget and help bring inflation down. Burnham himself has said he may need to ask people to pay a little more, and has refused to rule out a wealth tax, though he has committed to the manifesto pledge not to raise VAT, income tax or National Insurance rates. The OECD warned this month that Britain’s tax burden is already at its highest since 1948 and urged spending cuts instead of new revenue measures. Banks are lobbying hard against any new levy, arguing UK lenders already pay significantly higher tax than peers in New York and other European capitals, and that competitiveness would suffer. With defence spending, social care and technical education all competing for funds, Healey’s budget will test how far the government is willing to go on sector specific taxes before leaning on broader reprioritisation. - World Business News.

• 
  Jerome De Spencer (@clusterfeck) reported 27 minutes ago

  Click the pic for a full report especially if you are a NATWEST customer.

• 
  Dianne cox (@dianneport) reported 27 minutes ago

  @NatWest_Help @christobinsings Bring help back please 🙏 dreadfill we cant direct messeage as natwest now as golden tick preventing us from contacting you

• 
  Magic hat 🎩 (@themagic_tophat) reported 28 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.

• 
  AbolishHolyrood (@exilejock) reported 29 minutes ago

  @SigniusNetworks @PippaCrerar @Annaisaac Except he did meet the criteria. NatWest CEO Alison Rose had to resign due to her serious error after discussing Ferage's bank details with the BBC. The NatWest will have learned their lesson.