NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Ilkeston, England

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

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in Ilkeston and nearby locations:

• 
  David (@discodazeo) reported 4 minutes ago from Beeston, England

  @cathaypacific Been trying for 5 days to pay #cathaypacific with NatWest #mastercard for flights to Australia. A friend has also tried for me with a Tesco MasterCard. Not accepting payment. Clearly an issue with cp. Please help! I want to pay you £3600!!!

• 
  Elizabeth (@MOLLYBRUSH1903) reported 29 minutes ago from West Bridgford, England

  @GeorgeMonbiot Not Vodafone but had a bad experience during the whole Power of Attorney procedure. I felt that nobody really cared and it was very low priority. Have had apology and compensation from NatWest and Phoenix Life but there will be many who just put up with this shoddy service

• 
  Wolves Gang (@wolvesgang20) reported 29 minutes ago from Hucknall under Huthwaite, England

  I'm not in mood today because my ******* internet not working in my area and I tried to order iPhone 12 pro max and my card not working so I need to switch to NatWest from Lloyds and I really wants to move to London by end of the year because so many memories

NatWest Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Liam⚡ (@TheDeanio) reported 5 minutes ago

  @MmisterNobody Yes when I was going through am awful time I lost all my savings after listening to a bunch of fool about crypto. Pretty much everything I owned did well for a few weeks and all kinds of rich clowns be talking about HODL this HODL that like they're all some sort of secret alliance with the elites. I literally would have a bunch of different types of currencies so I had a variety. I could keep someone in for a good while and the moment I sold my bit of a specific coin, it would get a massive boost lol. One of them boost by like 10x within hours after me taking it out like they do it on purpose or something. The rest that I kept in just went down pretty much every day and some got rug pulled out of nowhere lmao. In the end I ended up that ****** up I made a stupid decision to take a loan out for only £10 grand where I got charged nearly £4-5 grand in interest from NatWest in just under a year. I ended up losing everything and I was guided to go insolvent lol. Still ****** now from it all and many people have the cheek to steal things from me. They want me dead, quietly suffering or locked up. They've told too many lies on my name because they couldn't take me out. Some of them have made a whole life out me these last few years too. It's quite hilarious. *********.

• 
  citizens2022committee (@c22cuk) reported 6 minutes ago

  c22cuk COMMENT: State Supported COMPLICITY? BANK CONFIDENTIAL @BankConfidenti1 - An independent report exposing concealed credit-line risk, systemic fraud and regulatory failure across Major Banks shown below. How many unknowingly in the ROI and UK have succumbed to these alleged FRAUDS and remain unaware, do read the Lorraine Morris @MLorrM Bank Confidential attachment in her Post (and her own summary statement contained therein) and if it triggers doubt, suspicion and concern in your mind that you might have been duped, Lorraine will no doubt point you in the direction of possible help - It would appear that these Frauds are still ongoing. The banking misconduct detailed in the Bank Confidential reports primarily occurred in the buildup to, during, and after the global financial crisis, broadly spanning from 2000 to 2017 (with certain related over-charging practices and legal disputes continuing to this day). The primary Banks named are - NatWest Group (formerly Royal Bank of Scotland Group) RBS-Global Restructuring Group (GRG) NatWest Ulster Bank Lloyds Banking Group (including HBOS) Barclays HSBC Coutts (a private banking subsidiary of NatWest Group) “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”.

• 
  Teds (@Tedtalks13) reported 8 minutes ago

  Sorry also lloyds BAU NatWest BAU HSBC uk bau With foi of all collaborations or service agreements in IT

• 
  Goodyear Blimp (@Goodyear_Blinnp) reported 12 minutes ago

  @pokemondealsuk Never had an issue with Chrome and Natwest debit cards

• 
  Mike64 (@walshie64) reported 16 minutes ago

  @TheGamesDeadM8 shocking how they've let that area down ,and all them skagheads go in the local natwest cos they've all got accounts in there ,one even had a piss in the mortgage interview room 😳

• 
  daz (@MetamateDaz) reported 23 minutes ago

  Andrew Tate explains how they hit one button and erased his ENTIRE life just because he was put on a terror list "Went to click Twitter. Twitter signed out. Clicked WhatsApp. Your WhatsApp's been deleted. Clicked Instagram. Of course, signed out. Clicked Gmail. Signed out. They pressed a button, Jack, and wiped every single thing from my phone. The Apple ID itself, so I couldn't download apps, and every single application was logged out. Uber, Airbnb, Skype, any app on my phone, all of them were gone. Coinbase? Everything. Every single app. All of my bank accounts.Coinbase. I had a NatWest and a HSBC bank in England. They seized all that money. Talk about that soon. Everything was frozen. Everything was gone. My entire phone just became a brick. And I called a friend of mine from my girlfriend's phone. I said, how ******** can they do this? And he said, they put you on a terror watch list. They can only do that if you're on a terror watch list."

• 
  Linda Pennock🙂 (@LindaPennock1) reported 25 minutes ago

  @bsd_junkie @DamianLow3 No, the bank did not back Alison Rose over Nigel Farage; instead, Rose resigned as CEO of NatWest after admitting she leaked private customer details to a journalist.

• 
  Melvyn Newell (@melv66722) reported 25 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).

• 
  Lorraine Morris (@MLorrM) reported 27 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

• 
  Magic hat 🎩 (@themagic_tophat) reported 28 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