NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Heanor, England

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

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

• 
  Elizabeth (@MOLLYBRUSH1903) reported 25 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 39 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

• 
  David (@discodazeo) reported 46 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!!!

NatWest Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  That ginger guy (@Jhinchliffe07) reported 3 minutes ago

  @DanNeidle Yeah i set up a stocks and shares isa with natwest in November and my return so far is 9.17% since Nov, Set it up as I'm self employed and didn't have a pension pushing 40 so thought I'd have something just incase i needed to access the cash but also long term invest

• 
  Magic hat 🎩 (@themagic_tophat) reported 7 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.

• 
  Sam Hosier (@AutoInfatuation) reported 7 minutes ago

  As of 1st June I am going back to being solely self employed and will need a new business account as a Sole Trader. Given up with having a physical branch to go to as we literally only have a HSBC and a NatWest left in my town now 🙃 Have had both a Monzo and Lloyds LTD Company Business accounts before and have a Monzo personal account I quite like. I keep being told Revolut Business is really good now they have their banking license? Most of my payments will be made via BACs either way, only need access for myself and also needs to be able to link up to Xero. What Bank does everyone suggest to go with or even avoid?

• 
  ryhn24.bsky.social 🦋 #freePalestine🇵🇸✊🫂🕊️🌅 (@rins2pworth) reported 10 minutes ago

  👍 people should have defunded all big 6 since 2008 Barclays HSBC RBS Lloyds NatWest can't think of the 6th one Coop best only bank not investing in arms and abuse of human rights Halifax Maybe nationwide though they pulled dodgy ****

• 
  Sports Geeez (@Sportsgeeez) reported 15 minutes ago

  England finishes at 387/3 126 runs in the last 10 overs Highest total at the Lord's. Except for that 2002 Natwest Final, 300+ target never chased down here. Joe Root remains unbeaten throughout the series. Gurnoor Brar bowled the 3rd expensive spell for India in ODIs. #ENGvIND

• 
  WGCitizens (@WGCitizens) reported 21 minutes ago

  My reward for years of customer loyalty to NatWest bank? Their pockets stuffed with profit and the high street branches closed, including WGC. Customer service? Nah, just shareholder fixation…and a failure to support those who’ve supported their company.

• 
  Ceri Smith (@CeriSmith5) reported 22 minutes ago

  @CraigMurrayOrg I had similar with NatWest about 15 years ago. Suddenly decided I was running my business through my account. As a sole trader, invoices were paid into it but I argued that was no different from having a salary paid in. They eventually stood down

• 
  NoOrdinaryFamily (@BooksFromNOF) reported 23 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.

• 
  Lorraine Morris (@MLorrM) reported 29 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

• 
  TRAXXAS58 (@TRAXXAS58) reported 31 minutes ago

  How tf can #Natwest reject my driving licence for being too blurry when their website automatically takes the picture for you once the card is in focus & in the correct position. Just waited an hour to be verified to be told no because they chose to apparently take a blurry pic.