NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Glasgow, Scotland

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

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

• 
  robert arbuckle (@maleysbhoy) reported 49 minutes ago from Cambuslang, Scotland

  RBS and Natwest banking apps are down. Cyberattack?

NatWest Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Jumpers For Goalposts (@Anthony86619842) reported 4 minutes ago

  @NatWest_Help 35 years as a NatWest personal and business customer and zero understanding of my business or the support you’d expect from your bank. Utterly aghast…..

• 
  Di Beirne (@ScattyCat) reported 6 minutes ago

  @NatWest_Help Hi Mikyla - thanks, I'm still having the same problem I'm afraid. I've just tried again now to make a payment to HMRC through their app but unfortunately, after their app transfers me to the NatWest app to approve the payment, I log in, then just get a blank screen. The ... cont.

• 
  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.

• 
  Ian Darbyshire (@Ian_darbyshire) reported 12 minutes ago

  @stevemiddi1 @ArturNadol7566 @LloydsBank I have the internal Natwest interest forecasts and they were all going down at that time.

• 
  Spencer (@SpencerGambles) reported 12 minutes ago

  **** happened with natwest but with around 20x more… absolute shitbags they are

• 
  Magic hat 🎩 (@themagic_tophat) reported 17 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.

• 
  Vlad G (@realvladhere) reported 18 minutes ago

  @pokemondealsuk NatWest no issues!

• 
  Musa (@mkhankhakwani) reported 19 minutes ago

  NatWest is a **** bank they stole my money as well

• 
  Funmi (@Funminz) reported 22 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.

• 
  dav1d.btc (@dav1dbtc) reported 22 minutes ago

  BoE warnings about stablecoin redemption are a joke. Try withdrawing any significant amount of cash from your bank and see how simple 'redemption' really is. Recently, UK bank NatWest blocked a customer from withdrawing their own money because they would not explain to the bank why the cash. And the Ombudsman backed the bank. This isn’t about consumer protection. It’s about protecting the banking monopoly. If Andrew Bailey is genuinely concerned about redemption risk, he should be looking at non-custodial systems like Ducat. Redemption happens in one Bitcoin block. I think I may be waiting some time.