Authorised by the FCA
This firm is on the FCA register and authorised to carry out regulated activities.
Website, phone number and address
Compare these against whatever you were given. Scammers clone real firm names and reference numbers but use their own phone number and website, so a detail that does not match the register is the clearest warning sign there is.
-
Phone number
-
Address
250 Bishopsgate, London, EC2M 4AA, United Kingdom
In the full report: 3 background checks, 1 thing worth a closer look
- When natwest.com first appeared online, and whether it can receive email
- What kind of line 07483 183438 is
- Whether EC2M 4AA is a shared office: 24 other firms give it
Other names (3)
If you were contacted under any of these names, it is this firm.
- The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc Former name: A name it was registered under before.
- Mentor Former trading name: A name it used to trade under.
- Williams & Glyn Former trading name: A name it used to trade under.
Warning
Scammers have impersonated this firm
Fraudsters have used this firm's name or details with their own contact information to appear genuine. Check whatever you were given below, and against the firm's real details above.
Fake phone numbers (3)
- 020 3740 9203
- 020 3740 9230
- 020 7859 4379
Fake email addresses (1)
- enquiries@fredricformby.co.uk
The FCA warning these came from
- Fredric & Formby/ Fredric and Formby/ Fredericks Ltd 6 September 2014
Scammers change these details often. Always check the live FCA warning.
FCA permissions and consumer protection
- Hold or safeguard your money · Handle payments & transfers FSCS may applyEligible deposits are typically protected by the FSCS up to £120,000 per person, per banking group.
- Give regulated advice FSCS may applyA claim for unsuitable advice is itself FSCS-protected, up to the limit that applies to the product you were advised on.
- Manage or trade investments FSCS may applyEligible investment and pension claims are typically FSCS-protected up to £85,000 per person, depending on the product and your circumstances.
- Sell or arrange insurance FSCS may applyEligible insurance claims may be FSCS-protected, often 90%, or 100% for compulsory or long-term cover.
- Advise on or arrange mortgages FSCS may applyMortgage advice and arranging may be FSCS-covered, up to the limit that applies.
- Lend or arrange credit No FSCS coverConsumer credit is not covered by the FSCS, so there is no compensation scheme if the firm fails.
- Complaints Ombudsman, freeYou can refer a complaint about this firm to the Financial Ombudsman Service for free, whichever activity it relates to.
Show FCA detail (26 permissions)
- Accepting Deposits
- Administering a regulated mortgage contract
- Advising on investments (except on Pension Transfers and Pension Opt Outs)
- Advising on P2P agreements
- Advising on Pension Transfers and Pension Opt Outs
- Advising on regulated mortgage contracts
- Arranging (bringing about) deals in investments
- Arranging (bringing about) regulated mortgage contracts
- Arranging safeguarding and administration of assets
- Assisting in the administration and performance of a contract of insurance
- Causing dematerialised instructions to be sent
- Credit Broking
- Dealing in investments as agent
- Dealing in investments as principal
- Debt Administration
- Debt-collecting
- Debt-counselling
- Entering into a regulated mortgage contract as lender
- Entering into regulated credit agreement as Lender (Excluding high-cost short-term credit, bill of sale agreement, and home collected credit agreement)
- Exercising/having right to exercise lender's rights and duties under a regulated credit agreement (excluding high-cost short-term credit, bill of sale agreement, and home collected credit agreement)
- Issuing Electronic Money
- Making arrangements with a view to regulated mortgage contracts
- Making arrangements with a view to transactions in investments
- Managing investments
- Safeguarding and administration of assets (without arranging)
- Sending dematerialised instructions
Limits on what they may do
-
Access to the electoral register
The firm shall access the full electoral register, where this is the most cost-effective way of verifying identity for anti-money laundering purposes and will not prejudice the interests of the customer, in order to carry out the current customer review exercise.
One supervisory condition set by the FCA
These are conditions the FCA places on the firm itself, covering things like capital it must hold and what it must report. They do not change what the firm may do for you.
- Requirement to the IMM Permission 1712876 (Public)
Reporting requirements 1. The firm must collect, record, and report to the PRA the following information on a quarterly basis in each calendar year: 1.1. its counterparty credit risk (CCR) EAD and CCR RWAs at aggregate level, and divided by exposure type (OTC derivatives, listed derivatives, repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions and margin lending transactions); 1.2. its exposures divided by exposure type, counterparty sector and by counterparty credit rating, showing both level and trend; 1.3. the composition of collateral for OTC derivatives, showing both average level of collateral types and trend by collateral type; 1.4. backtesting results on representative (actual or hypothetical) counterparty portfolios, including the results on the following: * 10, 20 or 40-day backtesting for collateralised transactions of OTC derivatives; * 5, 10 or 20-day backtesting for repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions and margin lending transactions; and * backtesting over at least a year for all uncollateralised transactions; 1.5. where the model relies on mapping to proxy transactions, or on proxy market data, a list of the affected products showing both the level and trend of these products and the results of the analysis to estimate the appropriateness of proxies for counterparty credit risk exposure calculation; 1.6. the results and analysis performed to calculate all capital adjustments held where there are identified limitations in the firm's CCR models and processes. 2. The firm must inform the PRA of any event that may have a significant impact on its IMM Permission, including in particular: 2.1) changes to the list of asset classes, products or counterparties listed in Table 2 of Annex 1; 2.2) use of a different model for exposure calculations under the IMM Permission; 2.3) changes to governance or senior management arrangements in relation to the IMM Permission; and 2.4) changes to the volumes or trends of trading for assets classes, products or counterparties listed in Table 2 of Annex 1. 2.5) changes to the volumes or trends of trading for legal entities in the scope of the IMM Permission. Maintenance of the group 3. This permission applies to each firm for as long as they remain part of the Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc. 4. Note on disclosure 5. The PRA has decided not to publish the full text and annexes of the IMM Permission as it has been deemed inappropriate and unnecessary. In particular, to do so might prejudice, to an unreasonable degree, the commercial interests of the firm[s] concerned. However, in the interests of transparency, the PRA's policy is to publish an abridged version of the IMM Permission, as a record that the IMM Permission has been granted.
FCA disciplinary action
FCA action
- fines
- 7
- in fines
- £387.6m
- most recent
- February 2016
-
Fined £14m on 5 February 2016
On 19 November 2014, the PRA issued a Final Notice to the Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, National Westminster Bank Plc and Ulster Bank Ltd (together the “Banks”), which imposed on the Banks, pursuant to section 206 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, a financial penalty of £14,000,000 for breach of Principle 3 of the FSA’s (and after 1 April 2013, the PRA’s) Principles for Businesses (now the PRA’s Fundamental Rule 6). The financial penalty was imposed on the basis that, during the period between 1 August 2010 and 10 July 2012, the Banks’ failed to meet their obligation to have adequate systems and controls to identify and manage their exposure to IT risks, in particular: i) the RBS Group’s Technology Services function (the centralised Group IT function which provides services to the Banks) did not manage and plan changes to the RBS Group’s IT systems adequately; ii) the Technology Services Risk, Business Services Risk and Group Internal Audit (together the “The Three Lines of Defence specific to IT for the Banks through the RBS Group), did not take sufficient care to control IT risks responsibly and effectively; and iii) the RBS Group had a limited understanding of IT operational risk. A copy of the Final Notice for RBS can be found on the Bank of England website and can be accessed.
-
Fined £60m on 20 November 2014
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) imposed a fine on the Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, (RBS) National Westminster Bank Plc (NatWest) and Ulster Bank Ltd (Ulster Bank) (together the Banks) £42 million for IT failures which occurred in June 2012 and meant that the Banks' customers could not access banking services. The Banks breached Principle 3 of the FCA Principles for Business in that they failed to take reasonable care to organise and control their affairs responsibly and effectively, with adequate risk management systems. The Banks agreed to settle at an early stage of the Authority's investigation and therefore qualified for a 30% (Stage 1) discount under the FCA's executive settlement procedures. Were it not for this discount the FCA would have imposed a financial penalty of £60,000,000 on the Banks. The actual cause of the IT incident was a software compatibility problem with the underlying cause being the Banks' failure to put in place adequate systems and controls to identify and manage their exposure to IT risks. The IT failure affected over 6.5 million customers in the United Kingdom for several weeks. Over the course of that period customers could not use online banking facilities to access their accounts or obtain accurate account balances from ATMs; customers were unable to make timely mortgage payments; customers were left without cash in foreign countries; the Banks applied incorrect credit and debit interest to customers' accounts and produced inaccurate bank statements; and some organisations were unable to meet their payroll commitments or finalise their audited accounts.
-
Fined £217m on 11 November 2014
The Financial Conduct Authority (the FCA) imposed a financial penalty of £217,000,000 on The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (RBS) of 26 St. Andrew Square, Edinburgh, EH2 2YB. The FCA's action took effect on 11 November 2014 and a copy of the Final Notice, which sets out the reasons for the action is displayed on the FCA's website and can be accessed via the following link: http://www.fca.org.uk/static/documents/final-notices/final-notice-rbs.pdf The foreign exchange market (FX market) is one of the largest and most liquid markets in the world. Its integrity is of central importance to the UK and global financial systems. Over a period of five years, RBS failed properly to control its London voice trading operations in the G10 spot FX market, with the result that traders in this part of its business were able to behave in a manner that put RBS's interests ahead of the interests of its clients, other market participants and the wider UK financial system. The FCA expects firms to identify, assess and manage appropriately the risks that their business poses to the markets in which they operate and to preserve market integrity, irrespective of whether or not those markets are regulated. The FCA also expects firms to promote a culture which requires their staff to have regard to the impact of their behaviour on clients, other participants in those markets and the financial markets as a whole. RBS's failure adequately to control its London voice trading operations in the G10 spot FX market is extremely serious. The importance of this market and its widespread use by market participants throughout the financial system means that misconduct relating to it has potentially damaging and far-reaching consequences for the G10 spot FX market and financial markets generally. The failings described in the Final Notice undermine confidence in the UK financial system and put its integrity at risk. RBS breached Principle 3 of the FCA's Principles for Businesses in the period from 1 January 2008 to 15 October 2013 (the Relevant Period) by failing to take reasonable care to organise and control its affairs responsibly and effectively with adequate risk management systems in relation to G10 spot FX voice trading in London. References in the Final Notice to RBS's G10 spot FX trading business refer to its relevant voice trading desk based in London. During the Relevant Period, RBS did not exercise adequate and effective control over its G10 spot FX trading business. RBS relied primarily upon its front office FX business to identify, assess and manage risks arising in that business. The front office failed adequately to discharge these responsibilities with regard to obvious risks associated with confidentiality, conflicts of interest and trading conduct. The right values and culture were not sufficiently embedded in RBS's G10 spot FX trading business, which resulted in it acting in RBS's own interests as described in the Final Notice without proper regard for the interests of its clients, other market participants or the wider UK financial system. The lack of proper control by RBS over the activities of its G10 spot FX traders in London undermined market integrity and meant that misconduct went undetected for a number of years. RBS's control and risk functions failed to challenge effectively the management of these risks in the G10 spot FX trading business. RBS's failings in this regard allowed the following behaviours to occur in its G10 spot FX trading business: (1) Attempts to manipulate the WMR and the ECB fix rates, alone or in collusion with traders at other firms, for RBS's own benefit and to the potential detriment of certain of its clients and/or other market participants; (2) Attempts to trigger clients' stop loss orders for RBS's own benefit and to the potential detriment of those clients and/or other market participants; and (3) Inappropriate sharing of confidential information with traders at oter firms, including specific client identities and, as part of (1) and (2) above, information about clients' orders. These failings occurred in circumstances where certain of those responsible for managing front office matters were aware of and/or at times involved in behaviours described above. They also occurred despite the fact that risks around confidentiality were highlighted when RBS received client complaints in October 2010 and January 2012, and, in November 2011, a trader questioned whether it was inappropriate to share information with traders at other firms or with clients. RBS was on notice about misconduct associated with LIBOR / EURIBOR during the Relevant Period. The FCA issued a Final Notice and a financial penalty against RBS on 6 February 2013 in relation to benchmark setting for LIBOR. Against this background, RBS engaged in an extensive remediation programme across its businesses in response to LIBOR / EURIBOR, including taking important steps to promote changes to culture and values. Despite these improvements, the steps taken during the Relevant Period in its G10 spot FX trading business did not adequately address the root causes that gave rise to failings described in the Final Notice. The FCA has considered the nature and extent of co-operation provided by RBS during the course of its investigation. The FCA acknowledges that RBS acted promptly in bringing the behaviours referred to in the Final Notice to the FCA's attention. RBS has also provided extremely good co-operation and taken significant steps to assist the FCA in its investigation. RBS is continuing to undertake remedial action and has committed significant resources to improving the business practices and associated controls relating to its FX operations. The FCA recognises the work already undertaken by RBS in this regard. The Final Notice relates solely to RBS's conduct in its G10 spot FX trading business in London. It makes no criticism of any entities other than the firms engaged in misconduct as described in the Final Notice.
- +4 more fines
In the full report: all 7 FCA actions
- The other 4, with their dates and amounts
- What the FCA found in each, in its own words
The Financial Ombudsman Service only publishes complaint figures for firms with 30 or more new complaints in six months, so there are none here for this firm.
Customer compensation schemes
The FCA has ordered this firm to review past sales and pay back customers who lost out.
- January 2015 To address possible selling issues affecting customers who purchased Card Security Products provided by Affinion International Limited, where the sale (or renewal) of such products was on or after 14 January 2005 and…
- August 2013 Following a finding of mis-selling against Card Protection Plan Limited ('CPPL'), in respect of those customers who were mis-sold policies.
The FCA's wording
-
Amendment to a consumer redress exercise
The Requirements became effective on 27 January 2015 and were supplemented on 15 May 2015. The Requirements shall be supplemented as follows: The definition of 'Scheme of Arrangement' at paragraph 1.33 of the Requirements shall mean the solvent scheme of arrangement under Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 described more particularly in Annex 1 hereto and all references in the Requirements to ”Scheme Document shall be references to the Scheme of Arrangement in Annex 1 hereto. Changes to the Scheme of Arrangement originally appended to the Requirements are highlighted through underlined or struck through text. Paragraph 5.1 of Part 3 of Annex B of the Requirements shall be amended so as to read as follows: If a Scheme Creditor disagrees with the amount of compensation payable to him, he may initiate the Dispute Resolution Procedure to refer the dispute to the Scheme Adjudicator, provided he does so within the time limits specified in Clauses 4.6 and 4.9 of the Scheme Document. If a Scheme Creditor disagrees with the rejection of his Claim Form by the Scheme Administrators, and provided that the Claim Form was received on or before 15 November 2016, he may initiate the Dispute Resolution Procedure to refer the dispute to the Scheme Adjudicator, provided he does so within the time limits specified in Clauses 4.8 to 4.10 of the Scheme Document.
-
Amendment to a consumer redress exercise
The Requirements became effective on 13 August 2013. The Requirements shall be supplemented as follows: The definition of 'Scheme of Arrangement' at paragraph 1.28 of the Requirements shall mean the solvent scheme of arrangement under Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 as sanctioned by the Court on 14 January 2014 (as subsequently modified in accordance with its terms) and as described more particularly in Annex 1 to this Supplemental Requirement. Changes to the Scheme of Arrangement as appended to Part 1 of Annex C to the Requirements are highlighted through underlined or struck through text. All references in the Requirements to ”Scheme Document shall be references to the Scheme of Arrangement described more particularly in Annex 1 hereto. Paragraph 5.1 of Part 3 of Annex C of the Requirements shall be amended so as to read as follows: If a Scheme Creditor disagrees with the amount of compensation payable to him, he may initiate the Dispute Resolution Procedure to refer the dispute to the Scheme Adjudicator, provided he does so within the time limits specified in Clauses 4.5 and 4.8 of the Scheme Document. If a Scheme Creditor disagrees with the rejection of his Claim Form by the Scheme Administrators, and provided that the Claim Form was received on or before 22 July 2016, he may initiate the Dispute Resolution Procedure to refer the dispute to the Scheme Adjudicator, provided he does so within the time limits specified in Clauses 4.7 to 4.9 of the Scheme Document.
-
Amendment to a consumer redress exercise
Supplemental Requirements 6. The Requirements shall be supplemented as follows: 6.1 A new paragraph 1.21(A) be inserted as follows: 'Extreme Distressed Suppression Population' means Scheme Creditors in respect of whom Schemeco and/or the Scheme Administrators receive a direct communication, in writing or otherwise, from: 1.21(A).1 that Scheme Creditor expressly requesting that no further communication be sent to that Scheme Creditor in connection with the Scheme of Arrangement; or 1.21(A).2 a third party on behalf of a Scheme Creditor stating that the Scheme Creditor is deceased and requesting that no further communication be sent to that Scheme Creditor in connection with the Scheme of Arrangement (provided that the Scheme Administrators are reasonably satisfied that the third party is authorised by law to make such a request on behalf of the Scheme Creditor), and in each case the Scheme Administrators reasonably determine at their discretion on the information available to them that the sending of further communications in connection with the Scheme to the Scheme Creditor will or will be reasonably likely to cause distress or harm.. 6.2 The definition of 'Scheme of Arrangement' at paragraph 1.33 shall mean the solvent scheme of arrangement under Part 26 of the Companies Act 2006 described more particularly in Annex 1 hereto and all references in the Requirements to Scheme Document shall be references to the scheme of arrangement in Annex 1 hereto. Scheme Claims Decisioning Procedures 7. The requirements set out in Annex B to the Requirements be supplemented by inserting a new paragraph 5.2 at Part 3 of Annex B as follows: 5.2 Certain time limits apply where Scheme Creditors wish to initiate the Dispute Resolution Procedure or (as part of the Dispute Resolution Procedure) to refer a dispute to the Scheme Adjudicator. These are set out in Clauses 4.6, 4.8, 4.9 and 7.1 of the Scheme of Arrangement.
-
Firm must undertake a consumer redress exercise
The firm is required to establish and operate a consumer redress scheme following a finding of mis-selling against Card Protection Plan Limited ('CPPL'), in respect of those customers who were mis-sold policies. 'Policies' (or 'policy') means CPPL's Card Protection Product, where the sale (or renewal) was on or after 14 January 2005 and was before the relevant Amendment Date (as defined in the scheme documentation); and/or CPPL's Identity Protection Product, where the sale (or renewal) was on or after 14 January 2005 and the sale was by telephone. The amount of redress may be calculated to off-set any claims made under the policy. This customer redress scheme must be implemented no later than 30 April 2014. Such consumer redress scheme shall be binding on the Financial Ombudsman Service. Further details are available on the FCA website: www.fca.org.uk
-
Firm must undertake a consumer redress exercise
The firm is required to establish and operate a consumer redress scheme scheme to address possible selling issues affecting customers who purchased Card Security Products provided by Affinion International Limited, where the sale (or renewal) of such products was on or after 14 January 2005 and was before the relevant Amendment Date (as defined in the scheme documentation). For full terms see the scheme documentation: www.aischeme.co.uk. The amount of redress may be calculated to off-set any insurance claims made under the Card Security Products. This consumer redress scheme must be implemented no later than 31 October 2015. This consumer redress scheme shall be binding on the Financial Ombudsman Service. Further details are also available on the FCA website: www.fca.org.uk/affinion-scheme.
Companies House record
The company behind the firm: its status, age, registered office and directors.
- Company number
- SC090312 (opens Companies House in a new tab)
- Company status
- Active
- Company type
- Public limited company
- Incorporated
- 31 October 1984 (41 years old)
- Registered office
- 36 St Andrew Square, Edinburgh, EH2 2YB
- Nature of business
-
- Activities auxiliary to financial intermediation not elsewhere classified (SIC 66190)
Directors and company secretaries
| Name | Role | Born | Appointed | Other companies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tamsin Elizabeth Edith Rowe | Director | Jun 1959 | 27 Mar 2019 | None |
| Anne Elizabeth Mcnab | Director | Mar 1958 | 17 Sep 2020 | 6 other companies |
| Simon Charles Lowe | Director | Feb 1966 | 28 Jul 2022 | 58 other companies |
| Sabrina Hania Wilson | Director | May 1971 | 4 Sep 2023 | 3 other companies |
| Jonathan Peberdy | Director | Jan 1978 | 1 Oct 2024 | None |
| Rupert William Hume-Kendall | Director | Jan 1962 | 9 Apr 2025 | 2 other companies |
| Thierry Charles Etienne Roland | Director | Dec 1965 | 14 Apr 2025 | None |
| John Devine | Director | Nov 1958 | 31 Mar 2026 | 48 other companies |
| Sarah Katherine Beddows | Secretary | Not published | 4 Sep 2023 | – |
Other companies run by these 8 directors
A firm is run by people, and their other companies are their track record: what they built, what closed, and anything that failed. It is the check most people never think to make.
- other companies
- 117
- closed down
- 71
- went insolvent
- 1
In the full report: all 117 companies, named
- What each company does, and whether it is still trading
- Which of these 8 directors sit on each board, and since when
- The one that went into liquidation or administration
- The 11 on the FCA register
- All 100 people who have ever been directors, with their dates
Key dates in its history
NatWest Markets’s history from the FCA register and Companies House, newest first.
2018
30 April 2018
- Changed its registered name from "The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc"
FCA register · Companies House
2016
6 April 2016
- Natwest Group PLC took control (75–100% of shares)
Companies House
5 February 2016
- Fined £14m by the PRA
FCA register
2015
27 January 2015
- FCA ordered a customer compensation scheme
FCA register
2014
20 November 2014
- Fined £60m by the FCA
FCA register
11 November 2014
- Fined £217m by the FCA
FCA register
6 September 2014
- FCA warned the public about a scam impersonating this firm
FCA warning list
3 January 2014
- FCA imposed a requirement (Requirement to the IMM Permission 1712876 (Public))
FCA register
2013
22 August 2013
- FCA ordered a customer compensation scheme
FCA register
1 April 2013
- Regulated by the FCA from this date
- Regulated by the Prudential Regulation Authority from this date
FCA register
2003
28 August 2003
- FCA imposed a requirement (Access to the electoral register)
FCA register
2001
1 December 2001
- Regulated by the Financial Services Authority from this date
- Became authorised by the FCA
FCA register
1988
11 March 1988
- Regulated by the Securities and Futures Authority from this date
FCA register
1984
31 October 1984
- Incorporated at Companies House
Companies House
In the full report: all 194 events
- All 194 events in its history (16 shown here)
- Every director appointment and resignation: 167
Firms connected to NatWest Markets
Other FCA-listed firms that share a director, phone number or address with NatWest Markets. A link shows who the firm is tied to, not whether either can be trusted.
- connected firms
- 4
- share a director
- 4
- share its postcode
- 3
In the full report: all 4 connected firms, named
- How each is linked: shared directors (4), the same postcode (3)
- Who links each one: the named directors, with dates
- 7 past links through former directors
Firms like NatWest Markets
Other firms of the same type (bank or building society), nearest first.
In London
Firms are listed by type and location, best known first. Being listed is not a recommendation: check any firm before you deal with it.
Get the full report on NatWest Markets
Everything on this page, plus everything locked above, in one dated PDF you can keep, file or send on.
- 117 other companies its directors have run, named
- 3 background checks on its contact details, 1 flagged
- All 194 events in its history
- 4 connected firms, named, and who links them
Instant PDF One-off payment Secure checkout by Stripe
Frequently asked questions about this firm
Is NatWest Markets PLC FCA authorised?
What is NatWest Markets’ phone number and website?
Is NatWest Markets a scam or clone?
Is my money safe with NatWest Markets?
Who owns NatWest Markets?
Who runs NatWest Markets?
How long has NatWest Markets been in business?
Has the FCA taken action against NatWest Markets?
Does NatWest Markets use any other names?
Sources and links
- Its entry on the FCA register register.fca.org.uk
- Its Companies House record gov.uk
- FCA notice: fined £14m on 5 February 2016 bankofengland.co.uk
- FCA warning: Fredric & Formby/ Fredric and Formby/ Fredericks Ltd fca.org.uk
- Check your FSCS cover fscs.org.uk
- Complaints the Financial Ombudsman Service can help with financial-ombudsman.org.uk
- Report a scam to the FCA fca.org.uk