NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Christchurch, England

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

• 
  Le Ref (@LeRef5) reported 1 minute ago

  @Feargal_Sharkey @NatWestGroup It was the public authorities that delayed it that long you halfwit. The plans were formed in 1940s (public control) The land was bought in 1975 (public control) Plans were dropped in 1976 after a Public Inquiry on the back of NIMBYism (public ownership) Plans were revised in the mid 90s and not pursued as there was not sufficient identified demand. Mid West water only merged with SE water in 2007 so the history has nothing to do with them. Nat West's Pension Fund owns a 25% stake, not NatWest. Plans were revised in 2013 and hit the usual barrier - locals, NIMBYs and organised groups have been campaigning against it for decades. So sure, it's all down to the evil privatised companies

• 
  🤔J🤷 (@jameseonline) reported 1 minute ago

  Hi .@NatWest_Help are you having issues with push notifications today?, I'm transacting on NatWest & RBS accounts and not getting anything despite having things turned on, thankfully money is where it should be but yea

• 
  MrBounceBack.com (@Bounce_BackLoan) reported 3 minutes ago

  Today’s @ShabanaMahmood “Don’t Pay We Won’t Take You Away” Award winner is Iftehar Ahmed director of AK Touchstone Limited. The @ukhomeoffice slapped his Company with a £30,000 civil penalty for employing two people with no right to work in the UK. He said **** right off I’m not paying that, so didn’t and didn’t pay a £47,362.00 Bounce Back Loan either, and has just been given a 5 Year Director ban instead. So the Government never got the £30,000 and would have had to pay back NatWest the £47,362.00 for Bounce Back Loan too. Lovely….

• 
  geekgoddess (@geekgoddess2024) reported 5 minutes ago

  I was in a union at NatWest and honestly they seemed more interested in protecting the company relationship than representing ordinary staff. So spare me the lecture that unions automatically speak for all working people.

• 
  AFRICA IS HOME GLOBAL (@AfricaisHOME2) reported 6 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.

• 
  G McAdam (@McAdam146810) reported 12 minutes ago

  @Mickskinz Web: Microsoft sign-in helper - has the option that you’ve forgotten all your sign in details. I had a nightmare with a fraudulent DD on PayPal. I complained, they did FA. Contacted my bank, NatWest, which cancelled DD and refunded me the money that had been taken. Good luck!

• 
  Ali@Makely (@MakelyStudio) reported 13 minutes ago

  I've designed products used by 50M+ people across Sky, Virgin Media, NatWest and Citibank. AI didn't make that experience less valuable. it made the gap between good judgment and no judgment impossible to ignore. here's what's actually changed in 2026...

• 
  Magic hat 🎩 (@themagic_tophat) reported 18 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.

• 
  thea (@th333aaa) reported 18 minutes ago

  I hate Barclays too but at least they don’t make it difficult for me to login when my app plays up bc my app doesn’t play up like NatWest does

• 
  ParteekNotPrateek (@randomcricfacts) reported 19 minutes ago

  @Weirdgripping84 159 gave him a good run but Natwest **** show should have been the end of him. The fact that Laxman also kept failing in 2002 is what helped pip it in Mongia’s favor coz he bowled.