Is Lloyds bank app down? Users complain it is not working
Another added: "Again!!!! And on pay day. When will I be able to access my app?"
Lloyds responded to concerns on X, saying: "Thanks for getting in touch. Sorry about this. Some customers are having issues with our app right now. Bear with us as we fix this"
Thanks for getting in touch. Sorry about this. Some customers are having issues with our app right now. Bear with us as we fix this. ^Will — Lloyds (@LloydsBank) July 31, 2025
HSBC, Halifax and Royal Bank of Scotland outages also reported
There has been more than a month's worth of unplanned tech and system outages in the last two years for nine of the UK's biggest banks and building societies, according to data published by the Treasury Committee earlier this year.
The committee – a cross-party group formed of 11 members – asked the lenders' UK chief executives to reveal the scale of recent IT failures and estimates for how much customers might be paid in compensation.
It comes after an outage led to days of disruption for Barclays customers at the end of January, coinciding with payday for many workers and the deadline for self-assessment tax returns.
Across the nine banks and building societies, there have been at least 158 IT failure incidents between January 2023 and February 2025, according to estimates they provided.
Common reasons given for the incidents include problems with third-party suppliers, disruption caused when systems were changed, and internal software malfunctions.
What is Downdetector?
Downdetector is an online website that allows users of popular services including X (Twitter), Instagram, Facebook, Virgin Media and more to report if they are having trouble with the services.
The site only reports an incident when the number of problem reports is significantly higher than the typical volume for that time of day.
Describing itself on its website, Downdetector is 'where people go when services don't work.'
Recommended reading:
The website monitors disruptions to various key services including the internet, web hosting platforms, banks, social media and more.
You can see the full methodology and learn more about how Downdetector collects status information and detects problems via its website.
In short, users can get involved by submitting any issue reports on the platform.
Problem indicators are also collected from social media and other factors on the web, Downdetector explained.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Bank shares surge after Supreme Court slashes car loan compensation payouts
Shares in banks climbed yesterday as investors breathed a sigh of relief after lenders were let off the hook for car finance compensation. The City watchdog estimated that the scandal will cost between £9billion and £18billion – much lower than the previously forecasted £44billion – after the Supreme Court ruled on Friday that lenders would not be liable for most of the payouts. Lloyds was the biggest FTSE 100 beneficiary – rocketing 9 per cent, or 6.82p, to a ten-year high of 82.56p. Shares in Close Brothers, one of the lenders most exposed to the scandal, soared 23.5 per cent, or 93.6p, to 491.4p. The 147-year-old company, which had set aside £165million for potential payouts, had seen its shares fall by around 15 per cent over the last 12 months ahead of the ruling. Shares in Barclays, which was less exposed than many of its rivals, rose 1.6 per cent, or 5.8p, to 362.45p. The FCA estimated the car finance scandal will cost between £9bn and £18bn after the Supreme Court ruled lenders would not be liable for most of the payouts And car finance specialist S&U climbed 9.2 per cent, or 160p, to 1900p. The company said that the Supreme Court ruling was a 'victory for common sense'. Chairman Anthony Coombs said: 'It will significantly boost confidence throughout the motor finance industry and benefit lenders and consumers in attracting investment and increasing competition.' The UK's highest court last week dismissed a judgment that had found 'secret' car loan commission payments between lenders and dealers were unlawful. That dispelled fears that motor finance mis-selling would be the most expensive consumer banking scandal since the payment protection insurance scandal in the 2000s. But the court did rule that in certain circumstances, the failure to properly disclose commission arrangements could be unfair and therefore unlawful. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) said on Sunday it would consult on a compensation regime, estimating that customers eligible for a payout were likely to get less than £950 each. Yesterday, Lloyds said: 'After initial assessment of the Supreme Court judgment, and pending resolution of the outstanding uncertainties, in particular the FCA redress scheme, the group currently believes that if there is any change to the provision it is unlikely to be material in the context of the group.' The banking giant, which owns motor finance provider Black Horse, had ring-fenced £1.2billion for potential compensation. In a statement, Close Brothers said: 'We look forward to engaging with the FCA in respect of the consultation.' Experts said that while the ruling had cleared up some uncertainty, there were still questions about the finer details of the FCA compensation scheme. Hyder Jumabhoy, a partner at law firm White & Case, said: 'Investors are comforted that a path through the uncertainty has emerged.' But he added it was 'by no means the end of the story and the FCA's statement could still have significant implications'. He also said that there could be a knock-on effect as the money set aside could now be used for other things including takeover bids. 'We expect this move to accelerate M&A activity due to some lenders having decreased risk appetite but also because of unused provision amounts becoming available for acquisitions,' Jumabhoy said. 'It could also prompt some car manufacturers to enter the UK motor finance market to steady the supply of finance to buyers of new vehicles.' Redress plans are 'completely impractical' The car finance industry has warned that a planned compensation scheme for unfair loans is 'completely impractical'. Stephen Haddrill, the director general of the Finance and Leasing Association, said that he has 'major concerns' after the City watchdog said it will consult on compensation from October, with payouts starting next year. The Supreme Court ruled last week that lenders were not liable for most complaints. But some consumers may get a payout if their relationship with the broker is deemed 'unfair'. Haddrill said: 'I've got a couple of quite major concerns.' The proposal has not 'come up with a solution of how you look at a whole range of factors' to decide if the lending was unfair. He said it was 'completely impractical' for redress to be open to loans dating back to 2007. 'It's not just firms that don't have the details about contracts, customers don't either,' he said. It came as the Financial Conduct Authority said consumers stand to lose up to 30pc of compensation if they sign up with claims managers, who take a portion of any money received. 'If we put a scheme in place it will be free,' FCA chief executive Nikhil Rathi said. It has already acted against 225 adverts over 'exaggerated claims', he said.
The Sun
6 hours ago
- The Sun
Banks see share prices rocket after being saved from paying out billions in car finance scandal
BANKS saw rocketing share prices yesterday after being saved from paying out tens of billions of pounds in the car finance scandal. Lloyds saw a jump after the Supreme Court removed the threat of £44billion industry pay-outs. Shares at the banking group rose eight per cent while Close Brothers soared by as much as 34 per cent at one stage after the Friday ruling. Barclays saw a jump of two per cent. Around 14 million drivers could still be entitled to pay worth up to £18billion but only for large commissions seen as unfair, going back to 2007. The case focuses on commissions paid by the lenders to car dealers with some higher interest rates which were not then properly relayed to buyers. But judges found dealers did not owe a 'fiduciary duty' of loyalty to customers. There is now concern over the fact firms might have to keep records from decades ago. John Phillipou of the Finance & Leasing Association said: 'I don't think it's good for investability that the reason for keeping the data is that you might get sued in 15 years time.' Chancellor Rachel Reeves was said to be ready to intervene if the bill hit £44billion — due to the damage it could do to the UK as a place of business. A compensation scheme will be consulted on in October. Drivers are set to see pay-outs of less than £950 from as early as next year, the Financial Conduct Authority said. eBay payment shake-up, Lloyds Bank sets aside £1.2billion for car finance payouts and little-known benefit Lloyds had put aside more than £1billion for the fall-out but said any change is 'unlikely to be material' for the group. 1
Telegraph
9 hours ago
- Telegraph
An establishment stitch-up at the expense of consumers
The market reaction to the Supreme Court's intervention in the car finance mis-selling scandal tells you everything you need to know about this grubby saga. Shares in Lloyds Bank, the UK's biggest car finance provider through its Black Horse brand, jumped as much as 7.5pc when trading commenced on Monday morning, leaving it at the top of the FTSE 100 leaderboard. The share price of Close Brothers, a specialist lender that is disproportionately exposed to the car finance market, surged as much as 25pc having sunk to 30-year lows as the industry braced for PPI-sized payouts. Shares in Bank of Ireland and Barclays, both of which have car finance arms, rose 4.2pc and nearly 2pc respectively. Make no mistake about it, the Supreme Court's ruling is a serious let-off for the banks and other lenders that have a big presence in the car loans space. True, revised payout estimations of between £9bn and £18bn to customers who were mis-selling victims is not to be sniffed at. However, even the top end of the range is less than half the £44bn bill the sector was collectively thought to be facing before the Supreme Court decision. The lower end would be just a quarter. It is a massive result for an industry that fought this case tooth and nail. Anthony Coombs, a former Tory MP and now chairman of lender S&U, whose shares had tanked 33pc at one stage, described it as 'a victory for common sense'. I'm not so sure about that. I certainly share the concerns of many about the shameless ambulance-chasing law firms and claims management firms that have helped fuel Britain's compensation culture. Clearly, it means there is a high risk of people jumping on the bandwagon and lodging bogus claims that the banks then feel the need to recover through higher borrowing costs for all of us. But that's hardly a new phenomenon – there will always be a relatively small number of chancers looking to game the system wherever they can. I'm less inclined to celebrate what has the unmistakable feel of an establishment stitch-up at the expense of consumers. I have a natural aversion to the armies of highly-paid lobbyists who go into bat for big business, skewing what is already a massive power imbalance even further. Consumers already face a David-versus-Goliath battle to be treated fairly. In this case, the scare tactics employed were particularly shameless as industry campaigners sought to ensure the Supreme Court's ruling was as favourable as possible to the banking community. Even now, despite a significant legal climbdown, these same activists felt the need to take to the airwaves to issue fresh apocalyptic warnings. Stephen Haddrill, the director general of the Finance & Leasing Association, claimed the scheme could push up borrowing rates for car-buyers as if somehow large corporations have no choice but to always pass on any additional costs to their customers. The same arguments were rolled out after Covid when companies claimed they were lifting prices to offset their own cost increases and they were no more convincing back then – with research suggesting pandemic profiteering was rife among the biggest companies. As if that wasn't sufficiently disingenuous, John Phillipou, chairman of the Finance & Leasing Association, weighed in too, complaining that there was a risk of harm to Britain's 'investability'. Still, lobbying is what lobbyists do and at least they make no attempt to hide their true intentions. Moreover, Phillipou is only echoing our alarmist Chancellor, and it is surely far more outrageous that she sought to meddle in the outcome. Rachel Reeves has absolutely no business at all involving herself in such matters, while there is zero evidence to back up her suggestion that large-scale payouts represented a threat to growth. Yet, as with the wrong-headed ousting of the chairman of the competition watchdog, the Treasury will stop at nothing in its attempts to deflect blame for Britain's floundering economy from the Chancellor's job-wrecking tax raid. The reasons for the UK's lack of competitiveness are innumerable and too often they can be laid at the door of 11 Downing Street. Reeves's willingness to side with bank bosses instead of standing up for the little man is also disquieting. The job of the Supreme Court judges is to ignore the noise and correctly apply the law but ministers seem to have allowed themselves to be captured by the lobbying fraternity. Voters may see it as another betrayal from a party that has waged war on hard-working families with its tax blitz. As Liberal Democrat MP Bobby Dean rightly said, Government interventions like this set a bad precedent if the reason for intervening is that it might damage industry, 'because then almost every consumer redress case would fall'. Dean, who is a member of the powerful Treasury select committee that polices the City, regulators and the Treasury, points out that compensation schemes give consumers confidence to borrow and invest, 'if they know they will be protected when companies take advantage of them'. It is now down to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to restore the balance after it confirmed it will consult on a redress scheme for those still entitled to compensation. But that hardly inspires confidence. After all, this is the same FCA that was described in a damning report by MPs and Lords just last year, as 'incompetent at best, dishonest at worst'; its actions as 'slow and inadequate.' The chances of the watchdog suddenly showing some teeth seem slim.
