NatWest status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours in Avon Dassett, England

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

• 
  Earnings Prism (@earnings_prism) reported 6 minutes ago

  NatWest Group $NWG announced the publication of the H1 2026 Pillar 3 documents for several large subsidiaries. The H1 2026 Pillar 3 documents for the subsidiaries are available on the NatWest Group plc website. The subsidiaries listed in the filing include NatWest Holdings Limited, NatWest Markets Plc, National Westminster Bank Plc, The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, and Coutts & Company

• 
  Halal&Tayyib Organics 🍃 (@NaturezFynest) reported 6 minutes ago

  @grok Ofcourse not! Why would they leave an Internet trail. Bank of England funds Natwest, HSBC, Barclays etc. An overnight shut down of all their accounts for unproven allegations.... no link, yeah okay! 👍

• 
  puristini (@jurisdoctrine) reported 6 minutes ago

  Emails included Wells Fargo Bank ING Direct HSBC Bank NatWest Capital One Citibank Chase Bank Dubai Abu Dhabi London Nigeria I opened accounts with login access as well. I went into both Chase and Citibank to deposit cheques sent by FedEx and UPS delivery service.

• 
  Mr Brondor (@MrBrondorDeFi) reported 8 minutes ago

  🔮BRONDOR ANALYSIS - ethereum:0x4a220e6096b25eadb88358cb44068a3248254675 WILL MAKE A NEW WAVE OF MILLIONAIRES Everyone wants the next 100x memecoin Meanwhile the real money is hiding in the most boring chart in crypto Let me explain why $QNT is set up different and how it actually makes people rich next run THE SETUP NOBODY SEES 🧿 Quant has a max supply of 14.88 million tokens. Not billion. MILLION. For context most coins have billions in supply. QNT has less tokens than some people have Twitter followers. Low supply plus institutional demand equals violent price moves when capital flows in. THE CONTROVERSIAL PART Quant won’t 100x because of hype. It’ll moon because banks are forced to use it. ECB Digital Euro. HSBC. Barclays. Lloyds. NatWest. Bank of England. SWIFT integration. These aren’t partnerships for marketing G. These are live pilots going into production mid-2026. When tokenized deposits go live in the UK the demand for QNT to access Overledger isn’t optional. It’s structural. HOW IT MAKES MILLIONAIRES Here’s the math nobody runs: QNT did $428 ATH in 2021 on pure speculation with zero real adoption. Now it has actual bank integrations and sits at $81. If it just returns to ATH that’s a 5x from here. If institutional adoption pushes it past ATH into price discovery? That’s where generational wealth happens. 14.88M supply means it doesn’t take much capital to send it parabolic. THE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH Most people won’t hold it long enough. It’s boring. It moves sideways for months. It doesn’t pump on Twitter hype. It tests your patience until you capitulate right before the move. The millionaires won’t be the traders. They’ll be the ones who understood the thesis and sat on their hands while everyone called them stupid. Low supply. Real adoption. Institutional demand. Patience. That’s the recipe G Not financial advice but the setup is right there for anyone willing to see it DYOR Tribe -Brondor

• 
  Alex ******* (@socialPolly) reported 9 minutes ago

  @NatWest_Help I did that, and they said I needed to speak to NatWest bank not the investment line. They transferred me through to an automated service that didnt understand what it was I was trying to get through to. So I gave up.

• 
  Gillian richardson (@gipsygillo) reported 10 minutes ago

  @NatWest_Help finding it incredibly difficult to access previous sainsbury’s savings account that transferred to natwest 😢😢😢😢

• 
  Goodyear Blimp (@Goodyear_Blinnp) reported 13 minutes ago

  @pokemondealsuk Never had an issue with Chrome and Natwest debit cards

• 
  Joseph Benjamin (@TheEcomLad) reported 13 minutes ago

  @FullyLV @Nugennath It’s not the same service though. My business partner had Coutts and was unhappy and switched to NatWest Premier. Myself, always had NatWest Premier and it’s been great overall. Have Barclays Premier too, but not many benefits compared to NW.

• 
  Daniella (@JupitorsL) reported 14 minutes ago

  @ZackPolanski Never mind me just down voting the community notes that are willfully ignoring the very valid point. It you got arrested for running into NatWest and smashing up their display, charged for it, then got done for robbing the bank later with no jury or due process you'd kick off.

• 
  Lorraine Morris (@MLorrM) reported 17 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