Partially upheld: irresponsible lending and failure to monitor account for vulnerability complaint against NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY (NatWest)
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6352316 of 2026-05-12T00:00:00+00:00. irresponsible lending and failure to monitor account for vulnerability complaint against NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY (NatWest). Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6352316 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-12T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY (NatWest) |
| Product | current account with overdraft facility |
| Claim type | irresponsible lending and failure to monitor account for vulnerability |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | NatWest must: (1) Refund all interest, fees and charges applied to the account from 16 July 2024 onwards; (2) Pay 8% simple interest on those refunded amounts from the date they were paid until settlement; (3) Pay £500 compensation for distress caused by NatWest's failure to recognise Mr F's vulnerability and provide appropriate support. |
Summary
Mr F complained that NatWest irresponsibly agreed overdraft limit increases he could not afford and failed to monitor his account for signs of vulnerability related to problem gambling. NatWest agreed eight overdraft increases between March 2021 and July 2024, with five applications made within a two-week period in July 2024. The ombudsman found NatWest's initial checks were proportionate, but the exceptional frequency of applications in July 2024 should have prompted additional investigation. By 16 July 2024, further checks would have revealed problem gambling, triggering a duty to support Mr F as a vulnerable customer. The complaint was partially upheld, requiring NatWest to refund all interest, fees and charges from 16 July 2024 onwards plus £500 distress compensation, but not gambling losses themselves.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that NatWest's initial checks in March 2021 and early July 2024 were proportionate and reasonable given the relatively low overdraft amounts and Mr F's declared income. However, the frequency of five overdraft increase applications within a two-week period in July 2024 should have alerted NatWest to potential financial difficulties. By the 16 July 2024 application, this pattern was sufficiently concerning to warrant additional checks. Had NatWest reviewed Mr F's account activity at this point, it would have identified problem gambling. While the ombudsman acknowledged the medical evidence suggesting intervention could have reduced harm, they were not persuaded on balance that Mr F would have ceased gambling entirely or not obtained alternative credit. Therefore, refund of gambling losses was not justified, but refund of interest, fees and charges from 16 July 2024 onwards was appropriate, along with distress compensation.
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