Upheld: irresponsible lending, failure to monitor repeat overdraft use, inadequate treatment of vulnerable consumer with gambling addiction complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6308838 of 2026-05-05T00:00:00+00:00. irresponsible lending, failure to monitor repeat overdraft use, inadequate treatment of vulnerable consumer with gambling addiction complaint against National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6308838 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-05T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company |
| Product | overdraft |
| Claim type | irresponsible lending, failure to monitor repeat overdraft use, inadequate treatment of vulnerable consumer with gambling addiction |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | NatWest must pay Mr W £500 total compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by: (1) failing to step in at the October 2024 review when Mr W was overusing overdrafts and showing signs of financial difficulty (£250); and (2) failing to treat him fairly as a vulnerable consumer and providing unclear communication regarding gambling blocks (£250). |
Summary
Mr W complained that NatWest acted irresponsibly when approving two £5,000 overdraft facilities in October 2021 and failed to treat him appropriately as a vulnerable consumer. After Mr W disclosed his gambling addiction in April 2024 and subsequently showed signs of financial difficulty by October 2024, NatWest sent letters about overdraft costs but failed to take proactive steps to contact him with suitable options to reduce overdraft reliance or reduce the facilities. Additionally, NatWest's communication regarding gambling block limitations was unclear. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding NatWest breached its CONC obligations by not intervening adequately when financial difficulty was evident, and ordered £500 compensation for distress and inconvenience.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
NatWest's initial lending decision in October 2021 was fair as proportionate affordability checks showed Mr W had sufficient disposable income. However, NatWest failed to meet its obligations under CONC 5D.3 when Mr W showed clear signs of financial difficulty from April 2024 onwards. After Mr W disclosed his gambling addiction, NatWest should have taken proactive steps to contact him with suitable options to reduce overdraft reliance, rather than merely sending letters inviting him to contact them. Additionally, NatWest's communication about gambling block limitations was unclear and did not adequately explain that blocks would not prevent overseas gambling transactions using different merchant codes, nor did it clearly explain the option to block specifically named gambling sites.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company, all decisions | 1,179 | 14% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website