Not upheld: Debt collection practices complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H, director of limited company C, complained that NatWest unfairly prevented C from dissolving by objecting to its strike-off due to an outstanding Bounce Back Loan, causing him ongoing director obligations, financial penalties, and personal distress. NatWest explained that the objection is made by the Department for Business and Trade as an interested party under the BBL scheme, not by NatWest, and that NatWest cannot remove it or control the process. The ombudsman upheld NatWest's position, finding that the objection arises from government policy within the BBL scheme rather than any unfair action by NatWest, and that the government guarantee does not remove the borrower's liability to repay the loan.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman concluded that NatWest has not acted unfairly because the objection to the strike-off is made by the DBT as a matter of government policy within the BBL scheme, not by NatWest, and NatWest does not control or have the ability to remove this objection. The government guarantee protects the lender, not the borrower, and does not remove the borrower's liability to repay the loan. It is therefore reasonable that an unpaid BBL prevents company dissolution. The ombudsman also noted that the complaint was brought by the company, not Mr H personally, so personal distress cannot be compensated, and no error or failing by NatWest has been demonstrated.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website