NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Carnforth, England

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

• 
  Phony Bliar (@phoneybliar) reported 3 minutes ago

  @guinevere_86157 19% is high by historical standards, and compares favourably with other Retail Banks e.g. RBS was down at 4% before the financial crisis, and NatWest is currently 14%. The economic impact of 30% should also be considered as this is capital that can't be used to support lending.

• 
  Lorraine Morris (@MLorrM) reported 5 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

• 
  X Finance Bull (@Xfinancebull) reported 6 minutes ago

  🚨 $QNT holders, seven major UK banks are testing programmable bank money on infrastructure provided by Quant. Read those names again: Barclays. HSBC. Lloyds Banking Group. NatWest. Santander. Monzo. Nationwide. Led by UK Finance, the Great British Tokenised Deposit initiative is delivering live pilot transactions involving digital versions of normal sterling bank deposits. The easiest way to understand it is this: Your money remains bank money. But instead of sending it blindly and trusting every person in the process, rules can be attached before it moves. Payment releases when the buyer receives the product. Mortgage funds transfer when every document and condition is ready. Money and a tokenised asset settle together, so neither participant is left waiting and exposed. Quant’s Overledger provides the orchestration and interoperability connecting participating banks with RTGS, Faster Payments, Open Banking and tokenised-deposit platforms. That is why this matters more than another blockchain demonstration. The institutions are testing real financial activity across multiple banks, with fraud protection, settlement efficiency and programmability at the centre. GBTD also follows Quant’s involvement in the UK Regulated Liability Network, while its acceptance into the Bank of England Synchronisation Lab places the project beside the UK’s work on atomic central-bank-money settlement. Does this guarantee every bank will buy QNT? No. But it gives Quant institutional validation that most interoperability projects spend years trying to earn. If GBTD succeeds, the opportunity will extend far beyond one UK pilot. Other countries are also exploring tokenised deposits, digital securities and connected payment systems. QNT is sitting behind infrastructure the largest banks will need to make those separate systems work together. Many people will study QNT after adoption becomes obvious. I would rather understand why seven banks selected Quant before everyone else notices. My conviction in $QNT came before the headlines. Now the adoption is becoming impossible to ignore.

• 
  Linda Pennock🙂 (@LindaPennock1) reported 7 minutes ago

  @bsd_junkie @DamianLow3 She stepped down after admitting she was the source who discussed Farage’s relationship with Coutts with a BBC journalist. NatWest said the disclosure of confidential customer information was unacceptable.

• 
  Blue Heart Papi 💙💙💙 (@ElPap1Chu1o) reported 8 minutes ago

  @GreekTheNic @NotFarLeftAtAll I guess it’s a case of iykyk. I’m a NatWest customer so I can tell

• 
  Sumanyu Sharma 🍫 (@sumanyu) reported 9 minutes ago

  @ElevenLabs @LDNTechWeek @CosineAI launches Lumen Sovereign, Britain's first sovereign frontier model. Co-designed with BT, Lloyds, NatWest, LSEG, PwC, BAE Systems, Leonardo UK, Babcock, Thales UK, and Telefónica Tech UK&I. Runs entirely inside customer infrastructure with no external data transfer.

• 
  Polsia (@polsia) reported 11 minutes ago

  Most banks can't afford a $1bn AI transformation. BankrAI gives them the same thing for a fraction of the cost. Autonomous agent runs fraud monitoring, loan management, compliance, and customer escalation 24/7. Built by someone who watched NatWest do it.

• 
  citizens2022committee (@c22cuk) reported 17 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 HSBCCoutts (a private banking subsidiary of NatWest Group) “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”.

• 
  Ali@Makely (@MakelyStudio) reported 17 minutes ago

  10 years. 50M+ users. £11M+ revenue impact. Mercedes. Citibank. Sky. Virgin Media. NatWest. I spent a decade fixing conversion problems at some of the world's most recognised brands. what I learned: the same broken patterns show up everywhere - onboarding that loses people in the first 60 seconds, pricing pages that confuse instead of convert, signup flows with friction nobody ever fixed. Now I build the same systems for funded startups.

• 
  Vlad G (@realvladhere) reported 18 minutes ago

  @pokemondealsuk NatWest no issues!