Not upheld: irresponsible lending and failure to monitor repeat overdraft use complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest)
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6256628 of 2026-04-02T00:00:00+00:00. irresponsible lending and failure to monitor repeat overdraft use complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest). Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6256628 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-02T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest) |
| Product | overdraft |
| Claim type | irresponsible lending and failure to monitor repeat overdraft use |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No remedy ordered. The ombudsman reminded NatWest of its obligation to treat customers experiencing financial difficulties fairly and encouraged Miss J to discuss her circumstances with NatWest if she believes she cannot afford to repay the overdraft. |
Summary
Miss J complained that NatWest lent to her irresponsibly by providing a £2,000 student overdraft in December 2018 and continuing to provide it despite her pattern of repeat use from 2023 onwards. The overdraft remained interest-free until November 2022, after which interest was charged. NatWest wrote to Miss J multiple times about her overdraft usage but received no response, and later provided forbearance measures in January 2025. The ombudsman examined Miss J's financial circumstances and found her income of approximately £2,500 monthly provided sufficient disposable income to sustainably repay the overdraft over 18-24 months. The ombudsman concluded that NatWest's monitoring and written communications were reasonable and that there was no regulatory obligation to take more significant action, particularly since Miss J did not disclose her mental health difficulties or financial struggles to the bank. The complaint was not upheld.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied CONC 5D.2 requirements regarding monitoring of repeat overdraft use. While acknowledging Miss J met the criteria for repeat use by 2025, the ombudsman examined her overall financial circumstances, including income of approximately £2,500 monthly and essential expenditure, concluding she had sufficient disposable income to repay the £2,000 overdraft over 18-24 months at approximately £100 monthly. The ombudsman found NatWest's written communications were appropriate first steps and that there was no regulatory obligation to take more significant action such as removing or reducing the overdraft. The ombudsman noted that Miss J did not disclose her mental health difficulties to NatWest, so the firm could not reasonably have been aware of or acted on this information.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company (NatWest), all decisions | 112 | 8% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website