REACTION to the RBS name change on social media was swift and damning.

Former SNP MP Dr Paul Monaghan said it seemed like a poor decision that would cost the bank thousands of customers and many jobs in Scotland.

“The problems at RBS relate to poor leadership, poor customer service and low morale among its much-undervalued and loyal staff – not its name,” he said.

READ MORE Name change won’t fix RBS reputation and could alienate Scots

The National columnist George Kerevan tweeted: “Let’s not get sentimental about end of @RBS name: bank started as vehicle to transfer English bribes to Scottish lords who signed Act of Union. We need a People’s Bank.” Another Twitter user said: “Yes, a name change will expunge its venal past.”

Amongst the commentators who are customers of RBS was Douglas Hepburn, who said: “Been with the bank all my working life. But cannot agree with the name change to NatWest. RBS is a Scottish institution ... totally wrong name choice.”

Many focused on the bank’s toxic past, but Matt Thompson doubted that could be addressed by a name-change: “RBS has been accused or proven to have undertaken just about every form of shady business practice a bank can engage in and it’s tainted their brand. But the name-change is about escaping the toxic brand? Really?”


READ MORE RBS could quit Edinburgh HQ in event of Yes vote

Twitter user GrievanceMonkey said: “After the SNP blame literally everything on Westminster, our national bank is to be rebranded ‘NatWest’, which stands for National WESTMINSTER. You couldn’t make it up.”

Craig Murray suggested: “How about Royal Bank of North Britain? The Royal Glorious Union Bank? The Boris Bridge Bank? The Prince Andrew Pizza Express Bank? The We Can Steal and Gamble Away Billions and Not Go to Jail Bank?”