NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Fleet, England

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

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

• 
  Lee @ 155 Farnham (@LordDroverson) reported 1 minute ago from Farnham, England

  @cjhunter1966 Natwest Farnham is now closing for good on October 4th. Terrible news. based i would think on financial decisions rather than taking care of customers. @NatWestGroup #farnham

• 
  Helsbels 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 🇬🇧 🇺🇦 (@hihings) reported 44 minutes ago from Bordon, England

  when I was with NatWest I could always get onto their app. With @HalifaxBank I can't. Too many branches closed and I need to access my account

NatWest Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Paul Lewis (@paullewismoney) reported 7 minutes ago

  @Helixd @OborneTweets It was entirely different. Coutts didn’t debank him. It told him he was no longer welcome as a customer and offered him an ordinary NatWest account - it owns Coutts. It was F who turned it into a victimisation story.

• 
  M K مسٹر خان (@mehrankhan89) reported 12 minutes ago

  @_zmc_x @Revolut Any main high street bank, like NatWest, TSB, Barclays, LLoyds, HSBC etc, won’t cause you any such unexpected issues.

• 
  Lorraine Morris (@MLorrM) reported 15 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

• 
  Callum (@rapiddescentsco) reported 16 minutes ago

  @isabelrosesss This is the NatWest/old RBS digital banking login. It is designed to use multiple authentication methods but they've just stuck with partial date of birth id/partial passcode for the last 18 years or so! It could use the EMV card reader, but that'd just confuse customers.

• 
  James Berkeley-Clarke (@JBerkeleyClarke) reported 16 minutes ago

  @Sargon_of_Akkad Probably an attack against sly news for harassing his family. Farage doesn't back down from a fight. Look at NatWest scandal he got the CEO fired! Watch what happens...

• 
  Matthew Dodd (@1doddy83) reported 17 minutes ago

  @CoachDebs_spa lol NatWest are ****. If it wasn’t for my DD they would be gone. Most high street banks now are ******* useless. You can’t do anything with your own money without handing over your inside leg measurement

• 
  NatWest (@NatWest_Help) reported 20 minutes ago

  @SpensGraem11427 Okay Graeme - if you're not a customer with NatWest, I'm afraid we'd have to direct you back to Northern Assist for further support with this! Please try getting in touch with them via phone and they'll hopefully be able to help. - Rachel

• 
  Lady Nikki Tees of Lochaber (@1950sLibrarian) reported 21 minutes ago

  @johntierney73 @NnatMmac @NatWest Natwest refused 2 payment on my account when my card was cloned. They knew I didn’t spend nearly a grand on Amazon or eBay usually. They then cancelled my card, issued a new one, and gave me a temporary overdraft to cover my standing orders & direct debits etc. Good service

• 
  Mark (@MTrad25) reported 25 minutes ago

  Friday 31 July — what’s moving The week ends with the cleanest illustration of the new rule anyone could ask for. Apple beat on almost everything. Revenue $109.4bn, +16%. iPhone $54.25bn, +22% — its best ever June quarter. EPS $2.02 against $1.89 expected. The stock fell after hours, on guidance. Amazon raised full-year capex to $220bn — a number that would have been punished a fortnight ago — and jumped ~8%, because AWS grew 36.7%, its fastest in over four years. Microsoft up, Meta down, Amazon up, Apple down. The market is neither rewarding AI spending nor punishing it. It’s grading proof. Note the casualty: for two weeks Apple was the hedge, capex at 1.8% of revenue making it the place to hide from spending anxiety. On the night the spenders got paid, abstaining stopped earning a premium. Asia took the same message and amplified it violently. The KOSPI rose as much as 17% — its best day on record. Samsung and SK Hynix up near 30%. Taiwan +7%, Nikkei +5%. Now the number that matters: the KOSPI is still down ~25% for July, its worst month since 1997. A 17% day inside that is not recovery. It’s a market with the leverage stripped out of it — Korean authorities spent the week reining in leveraged products that had wiped out retail savings. And the FX story is the week’s thesis in miniature. Japan and Korea intervened jointly on Thursday — unprecedented, with the yen near a 40-year low. Then the BoJ held rates on Friday and the yen went straight back to 160.69. Coordinated intervention by two states bought roughly one session. Nothing about the rate differential changed, so nothing about the yen did. Which rhymes with the central banks. The Fed’s statement was near-identical to June’s — one verb and three dissenters — and Warsh signalled a step back from forward guidance. The BoE held 3.75% on a 6-3 vote, three hawks where two were expected, then Bailey immediately told reporters not to read it as edging towards a hike. September hike odds fell to 40% from above 50%. The bond market’s answer: long-end US yields near 19-year highs while the short end eased. A steepener built on doubt that anyone can anchor inflation. In London: the FTSE 100 touched a record 10,979.60 intra-day then closed down 0.1%. Rolls-Royce led, +6%, on H1 operating profit up 17% to £2.42bn. Today: NatWest, Taylor Wimpey, ITV, plus Exxon and Chevron. FTSE futures +0.4%. This was the week guidance died. Warsh won’t give it. Bailey disowned his own committee’s. Two governments spent reserves defending currencies and got a day. And Apple’s forecast cost it more than a record quarter earned. Everyone is being marked on evidence now.

• 
  Funmi (@Funminz) reported 26 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.