NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Blackburn, England

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

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

• 
  Margaret's home made crafts for charity preston. (@CakesMargaret) reported 30 minutes ago from Preston, England

  @NatWest_Help Natwest the bank that chose to freeze then close my account, i was not i debt to the bank in fact had more then enough money in it, my crimb i bought some new furniture for my new home. For this the bank refused to talk to me. If i where your customer i would get out fast.

NatWest Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Maurice Andrews (@maurice_an63983) reported 25 seconds ago

  @Neccccy No because he at the moment doesn't support HBOS Lloyds Banking Group Barclays RBS Natwest Unicredit Private Equity Vulture Funds serious criminal activities fraud forgery perjury false declaration to courts

• 
  Sam Hosier (@AutoInfatuation) reported 1 minute 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?

• 
  Matthew Dodd (@1doddy83) reported 3 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

• 
  Mr Brondor (@MrBrondorDeFi) reported 5 minutes ago

  PRICES GOING DOWN AND YOU’RE PANICKING? This is nothing compared to what’s coming G ethereum:0x4a220e6096b25eadb88358cb44068a3248254675 - ECB Digital Euro pioneer. HSBC Barclays Lloyds NatWest all using Quant tech. Bank of Japan collaboration. SWIFT integration. Down 80% from ATH while connecting the entire financial system to blockchain. bittensor:native - NVIDIA dropped $420M. Jensen Huang endorsed it publicly. Grayscale ETF filed. $43M Q1 revenue. The CEO of the most valuable company on Earth validated your bags. And you’re scared of a red week? solana:rndrizKT3MK1iimdxRdWabcF7Zg7AR5T4nud4EkHBof - Apple featured them at WWDC. NVIDIA partnership. 45K+ GPU nodes. Powering the infrastructure AI needs to run. These aren’t memecoins hoping for a tweet G These are the protocols institutions are building on RIGHT NOW while you consider selling at the bottom. Red candles are the entrance fee. Conviction is the ticket to generational wealth. The ones who sell here will buy back 3x higher and call you lucky. You’re not lucky. You’re early. You’re informed. You’re positioned. Zoom out. Lock in. Let the weak hands exit. We’ve seen this movie before. We know how it ends. Not ******* selling Tribe -Brondor

• 
  DJ-🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 (@DJUK61212471) reported 5 minutes ago

  Anyone on here using the natwest bank app , is it down for you too ? Not the normal 15 min maintenance break just unresponsive!

• 
  Palash (@ABiggerSpalash) reported 8 minutes ago

  wtf i never noticed rajeev shukla was there at the natwest final too 😭

• 
  ParteekNotPrateek (@randomcricfacts) reported 8 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.

• 
  Funmi (@Funminz) reported 9 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.

• 
  geekgoddess (@geekgoddess2024) reported 11 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.

• 
  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