National Westminster Bank Public Limited · DRN-6053808

The complaint Mr U has complained that National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company “NatWest” refused to issue a new card on his credit card account. Mr U’s credit card was originally with a different provider but NatWest is now responsible for responding to this complaint. To keep things simple, I’ll refer to NatWest as the credit card provider throughout this decision. What happened All parties are familiar with the facts of this case so I’ll only briefly set them out here. Mr U’s account fell into arrears and Mr U agreed temporary repayment arrangements with NatWest between July 2024 and July 2025 to bring his account back in order. In July 2024, when NatWest was due to issue a new card to him, as his accounts were in arrears, it did not reissue him with a card. Mr U says he remained in regular dialogue with NatWest and was led to believe by a NatWest advisor that once the arrears were cleared on his account, he could resume using his account. But now that’s happened, NatWest still refused to issue a new card to him so he raised a complaint. NatWest explained that Mr U had been in arrears for a considerable amount of time, and due to the arrears status, when it was time to issue him with a card, it did not issue him with a card. NatWest said it has acted in line with the account terms and will not be issuing Mr U with any cards. But it did offer Mr U £75 compensation for the advisor incorrectly telling Mr U that he would be issued with a new card once the arrears were cleared on his account. Unhappy, Mr U referred his complaint to our service reiterating his earlier points. Mr U asked that a new card be issued to allow him to make use of the high credit limit on his NatWest credit card account rather than having multiple cards with other providers with lower limits. Mr U had suffered genuine difficulty but felt he was now able to manage his account correctly. Our investigator looked into the complaint and didn’t agree that it should be upheld. They said NatWest appeared to have acted in line with the account terms which allows it to refuse to give him a new card. They agreed that NatWest’s offer of £75 compensation for the wrong advice was a fair way to put matters right. Mr U didn’t agree saying he felt NatWest should honour what its advisor had said. He said he needed the credit card due to financial difficulty. He adds that if he’d been correctly told that the arrears situation would lead to NatWest refusing to issue a card to enable him to make use of the credit card account, he could have borrowed money from family and friends to clear the arrears sooner. As the complaint couldn’t be resolved, the complaint has been passed to me to make a decision. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable

-- 1 of 3 --

in the circumstances of this complaint. In considering what is fair and reasonable, I need to have regard to the relevant law and regulations, regulators’ rules, guidance and standards, codes of practice and (where appropriate) what I consider having been good industry practice at the relevant time. I’m sorry to hear about the impact the situation is having on Mr U. Having considered all the circumstances, I’ve reached the same overall conclusions as the investigator for broadly the same reasons. I’ve read and considered the evidence submitted by both parties, but I’ll focus my comments on what I think is relevant. If I don’t comment on a specific point, it isn’t because I haven’t considered it, but because I don’t think I need to comment in order to reach what I think is the right outcome. This is not intended as a discourtesy but reflects the quick and informal nature of this service in resolving disputes. Mr U’s complaint is that had he known that NatWest would refuse to issue him with a card due to the arrears on his account, he would have borrowed money off his family sooner than he did to clear the arrears on his account to prevent the withdrawal of the credit limit. NatWest says that it has made no error in its decision to not issue him with a new card, and while Mr U might’ve been given incorrect information, it has offered £75 compensation for this. I can see NatWest sent Mr U regular arrears letters starting from September 2022 and it agreed repayment arrangements with him to help him with his debt. A letter in March 2023 specifically said that if Mr U didn’t make the monthly payment there could be further repercussions for him such as the account going into default. This says that if the account is defaulted, than his agreement with NatWest could be terminated. Additionally, he was sent regular statements informing him of the arrears status of the account. As set out by our investigator, the account terms allow NatWest to refuse to issue a card and restrict the use of the credit facility where it has reasonable grounds to believe that a consumer may have difficulty repaying the amounts owed. As mentioned above, in July 2024, NatWest says that a new card was due to be issued, but due to the arrears status of the account, it did not re-issue him with a new card. As explained, the decision to refuse to re-issue a new card was made in July 2024. It seems Mr U was indeed in regular contact with NatWest between 2024 and 2025 to try and get a hold of his financial situation and he’s agreed repayment plans to make payments towards the account. In July 2025, his account balance was over £5600, with arrears of over £700. Mr U did call NatWest to ask it to confirm the full balance due on his account as he’d asked his family to help him repay the amounts due. And like our investigator says, it does look like he was, at this time, led to believe once the balance was cleared, the account would resume as normal and he’d be able to continue to use the credit account. Where a bank makes an error like this, a consumer is not entitled to what they were wrongly told. They are entitled to be put in the position they would have been in, had they been correctly advised. What this means is that Mr U is not entitled to a new card and to continue to have access to the previous credit limit because this is what he was wrongly told. He is entitled to be in the position he would have been in had the advisor correctly told him that his account could not be reinstated which is the position he is in. I fully understand why Mr U is so disappointed and agree that NatWest should compensate him for the disappointment caused. Although, in my view, the call itself being wrongly handled hasn’t affected the outcome. At this time, the decision to not issue Mr U with a card had already been made, so nothing the advisor did could have led to a different outcome.

-- 2 of 3 --

Overall, I think the offer of £75 to compensate him for the incorrect information given to him on the call is a fair way to put matters right. Mr U has added that had he known that the arrears status would eventually lead to this situation, then he would have asked for help from his family sooner than he did. But the account terms are given to consumers when they open the account and it does make it clear what circumstances credit card facilities can be withdrawn. This is also in line with usual industry practice. If consumers struggle to manage an account in line with the agreed contractual terms, than the account can be withdrawn, closed or defaulted. I don’t think NatWest has done anything that is unexpected given the struggles Mr U had with the account. So, while I sympathise with Mr U, I find no grounds to direct NatWest to do any more than its already offered. Putting things right To the extent not already done so, NatWest must pay Mr U the £75 it has offered for the incorrect information given to him. If Mr U accepts this offer, he should tell NatWest how he would like this payment to be made. My final decision For the reasons I’ve explained, I uphold this complaint only in part. National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company must put things right in the way I’ve set out above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr U to accept or reject my decision before 14 May 2026. Asma Begum Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --