In October last year Hannah Mayne walked into the local branch of NatWest
Bank and asked for an overdraft of £50. Although she was an unemployed
teenager whose only income was from benefits, the man behind the counter
said that would be no problem. In fact, she could have £1,200 if she wanted.
Ten minutes later Hannah walked out with £850 in cash in her pocket and the
facility to access £350 more. Three weeks after that she took a heroin
overdose. She had spent every penny of NatWest’s money on drugs.
Taken on its own, the irresponsible way in which a bank will lend to a young
person with no discernible way of paying it back these days is a worrying
enough story. As the high street banks recently announced record profits,
the Office of Fair Trading is demanding new rules to outlaw reckless
lending. But what makes this case worse — much worse — is that the bank had
been told by Hannah herself that she was a drug addict. Hannah’s mother,
Kate, an interior designer who specialises in historical buildings, had
persuaded her to do the responsible thing by cutting off her money supply
for drugs. Together she and Hannah, then 18, visited her local branch in
Brighton and asked it to stop giving her credit — by credit card or
overdraft — because she was a drug abuser and would only rack up debts to
feed her habit. The member of staff there listened sympathetically and wrote
the details into her file. Kate and Hannah remember her turning the computer
screen around and showing them what she had written.
But several months later, frantically trying to placate a dealer to whom she
owed money, a dishevelled Hannah went to a NatWest branch again to chance
her arm in pleading for £50 to offer him as an interim payment. She was, she
says, amazed when the offer came back to lend her 24 times that amount. “I
didn’t really understand when they said ‘You can have the money in your hand
today’,” she says. “I was in there only five or ten minutes.” Anxious to get
out of Brighton, she and a fellow addict disappeared to Birmingham together.
While she was away her mother opened her bank statement and saw to her
horror that Hannah was £1,199.97 overdrawn. Kate phoned the branch and told
it in tears that the agreement not to give Hannah any more credit had been
broken. “If she overdoses, I will hold NatWest responsible,” she said.
A few days later that is precisely what happened. The hospital in Birmingham
called Kate and said that Hannah was in intensive care. If her friend hadn’t
found her in the hostel, she would have died. The branch told Kate it could
find no information about Hannah’s condition on her file because the
computer would wipe off any notes after a certain period of time.
Hannah recovered, but that was by no means the end of her problems. It
transpired that Natwest was charging Hannah £40 a month for the overdraft.
Her entire income comprises £70 a week income support and £160 a month
disability allowance. Kate urged her to apply for a special loan to pay it
back but, in one of the strange anomalies of modern banking, she was told
that she didn’t qualify because “her income is from benefits”. So, asked her
mother, she qualified for the £1,200 overdraft while on benefits but not for
a loan to pay that debt back? Yes, said the bank. This baffling — and, in
Kate’s view, immoral — contrariness is one of the main reasons that she has
decided to speak out about Hannah’s problems and the way in which the system
generally, ranging from drugs support projects to the NHS, thwarts families
trying to cope with a child on drugs. NatWest in effect, and irresponsibly,
bankrolled her daughter’s overdose, she says. It offered a compromise deal
in which it would waive the bank charges and Hannah could pay it off at £30
a month. The Maynes refused on principle since they maintained that it was
the bank’s fault for having given out the money in the first place.
Their other motive in speaking out is to puncture the myth that it is only
kids on sink estates who get hooked on heroin. “Anyone who thinks that this
affects only poor people is kidding themselves,” Kate says.
The first thing to be made clear is that NatWest is not to blame for Hannah’s
heroin addiction, and the Mayne family knows that. Nor is a deprived or
broken background. Hannah, now 19, has enjoyed a more privileged upbringing
than most. She went to a beacon school in Chichester, her mother has a
successful and creative career in London, while her father is the financial
director of a major company. The family home is a beautiful Georgian house
on one of the most exclusive streets in Brighton. The Maynes’ younger
daughter suffers no such problems. Yet in the past year the couple have
spent more than £20,000 putting Hannah through the Priory and, in times of
desperation have given her hundreds more pounds for drugs, unable to bear
the sight of her body “rattling” for a fix.
They have, during her psychotic and violent episodes, begged in vain for
doctors to section her under the Mental Health Act. They have watched
helpless as she has stolen to fund her habit. Kate, who spends her working
days consulting with QCs, sometimes has to laugh bleakly at the surreal
duality of her existence: by day she can be lunching with barristers at
expensive restaurants, by night meeting drug dealers in squalid back alleys
to pay them off, in the hope that they won’t harm her daughter. “You end up
doing things you never dreamt in your worst nightmares you would do,” says
Kate. “But this is the reality of having a child addicted to heroin, and it
can happen to anyone. There is not enough help out there, and I want people
to know just how hard, how utterly defeating, it is coming up against the
system.” Hannah was always a vulnerable child, prone to depression possibly
because she suffered a partial disability, Hirshsprung’s disease, which left
her incontinent until about the age of 10. Although she was an A student,
the condition made her withdrawn, and she shrugged off affection. “I used to
say that she was the daughter with barbed wire around her,” says Kate. Her
descent into addiction probably started when she was about 13 and began
binge-drinking and truanting from school. Kate recalls driving around the
streets looking for her when she failed to return home. At 16 Hannah dropped
out of school and the family moved to Brighton. Her distraught parents knew
that she had experimented with cannabis but were more concerned at that time
about her alcohol intake. For a time in 2004 they sent her to live with
family in Wales to recuperate. Ironically and unbeknown to them, it was
there, in a rural town, that she first tried heroin.
But it wasn’t until October 2005 that Hannah confessed that she had addiction
problems. It was a Sunday morning and Kate and her husband were at church
when Hannah dramatically crashed through the door, tears streaming down her
face and, high on cocaine and alcohol, said that she needed help. She had
run up debts of almost £1,500 with NatWest and couldn’t control her alcohol
and drug habit.
Her parents were appalled but took her home, put her to bed and set about
trying to sort out the problem. First they paid off her debts and then, in
December 2005, Kate and Hannah visited the branch to tell it about her
addiction and ask for credit to be stopped. Hannah was then booked into the
Priory for a month to be treated for alcoholism and drug abuse. She came
home looking healthy. The family got her into a sheltered housing project
for people dependent on drugs. All seemed to be going well. In February on
Kate’s birthday Hannah wrote her mother a card. “It was a beautiful card
saying that she wanted to get better and make me proud of her,” says Kate.
“Two days later she relapsed.” The reason was that Hannah’s boyfriend Joe,
whom she had met at the project, had died from a heroin overdose. She was
due to meet him that day at a coffee shop but he never turned up. “I’d never
experienced death before,” says Hannah, a beautiful but frail girl in
a stained red anorak that looks pathetically misplaced in her parents’
elegant home. “The day before, I had hugged him and was due to meet him the
next day. It totally freaked me out. I wanted to forget about everything; I
just didn’t care at that time. So I started taking heroin and crack.”
Thus began Hannah’s real dependence on heroin. Kate’s face wearies as she
recounts the umpteen nightmarish incidents that have accompanied it. There
have been more expensive visits to the Priory; times when she has tried to
attack her younger sister; when she has broken into the family home stealing
cameras, jewellery and television digiboxes to raise cash; the endless
mopping up of the vomit and diarrhoea. For a time Hannah lived on the
streets with a boyfriend, who committed petty crimes to get hold of enough
money for them to score.
Once, in front of three policemen who had been called to the house, she
lunged at her mother with a glass. “She went completely berserk, scratching,
hitting and screaming ‘I’m going to f***ing kill you’,” says Kate. “The
police sprayed her with pepper spray. Even then the doctors wouldn’t section
her. I asked the police, ‘Does she actually have to kill me first?’ and they
said ‘Probably’.” With the benefit of hindsight Kate and her husband know
that they did things wrong. They should have shown Hannah more “tough love”,
pressing charges when she burgled their house (she had been denied access to
the house to protect her younger sister), and refusing to give her money.
But, as she says: “My learning curve with heroin was about to begin. I had
no idea what to expect or how bad it would be.
“My husband hated me giving her the money. But she would come round screaming
and begging, and very often I just did. I found it very hard not to. It’s
painful to see your child like that. She would be shaking and desperate for
her next fix.
“She would say, ‘If you don’t give me something I’ll steal, shoplift, beg,
pickpocket’. I didn’t want her ill and vulnerable on the streets, ripe for
attack. You are caught every which way — damned if you do, damned if you
don’t.” The absurdity of her double life — straddling the rarified world of
London’s historic buildings and the feculence of Brighton’s smack-dealing
community — often feels surreal. She remembers once staying with Hannah
in a hostel while she injected heroin into her arm (in case she overdosed by
accident) — “a horrible, pitiful, really degrading sight” —
then getting in a car and driving to Chichester to watch a fashion show.
“You find yourself in a pub in Hove waiting for a dealer and thinking about
when your beautiful little girl used to be in a party dress.”
But it is the lack of help that has floored them most. Housing schemes and
drug treatment programmes impose ludicrously inflexible rules that are
peevishly incompatible with the chaos of an addict’s life, she says. At A&E
you are treated like “scum” if you are a drug user. There are groups, and
groups within groups, but no one is taking an overview; it is a system of
ever-decreasing circles in which no one takes charge. “I am reasonably
articulate, educated and in good health, and it utterly defeats me,” Kate
says. “Imagine what it must be like if you are not?” The attitude towards
users like her daughter, she says, is punitive and rigidly inflexible. A
vast number of heroin users take the drug to mask the pain of mental
illness, yet we choose to punish them for it, she says. And the system is
hopelessly bureaucratic — a tangled web of key workers, support
services, hostels and benefits offices.
“In my experience none of the different agencies talks to each other. Addicts
fighting to get off the drug have to battle against so much bureaucracy to
get clean. It’s almost impossible for them.” Methadone doesn’t work for many
addicts; it hasn’t for Hannah. Some simply develop a double habit. Kate
believes that heroin being medicalised, not criminalised, is the only way.
David Raynes, an executive counsellor on the National Drug Prevention
Alliance, agrees that there needs to be more coordination between police,
social services and local authorities, but doesn’t think offering heroin to
addicts on the NHS would cut crime, or help individual users. “One big
criticism at the moment is that the best treatment you get is in prison.
This has to change. But just giving people heroin to stop them committing
crime will not work because you are not stopping their behaviour, or dealing
with their lifestyles and mental issues,” he says. Open-ended heroin
programmes would be incredibly expensive for the NHS. Health professionals
also point out that users would also still be injecting, up to three times a
day, increasing the risk of infections such as HIV and hepatitis. At least
methadone is taken orally, he says, and only once daily.
Meanwhile, Hannah, beautifully spoken but gaunt from months of anorexia, is
still utterly dependent on heroin, begging her parents for money each day
and coming to the conclusion that she no longer wants to live. Heroin for
her is not a high, merely a painkiller. “Some people are born and just know
how to live life, but I don’t know how to do a lot of things that other
people just know,” she says. “Ever since I was young I’ve needed a drink to
deal with social situations with friends. I had low self-esteem, I hated
myself; getting wasted was a way of feeling free.” She summarises heroin
addicts’ catch22: always chasing the feeling that they had the first time
they used the drug but never ever finding it again. “Before I became a
heroin addict I thought it was just people you see on the streets, but that
is a small percentage. I’ve met people with mortgages, jobs. On the outside
they have a normal life, but on the inside they are addicts.
“I hate my life and really do want to sort myself out. But I find life really
difficult.” A few days after this interview Hannah decided to attempt
suicide. She first resolved to jump off a multi-storey car park, then said
that she would inject air into her veins. Her mother stopped her and took
her, weeping with desperation, to A&E. She was admitted but, despite her
threats to kill herself, doctors again refused to section her. A few hours
later she left hospital and went in search of drugs. “What is the point,
Mummy?” she asked. “I may as well die.” Kate and her husband are in utter
despair but refuse to be secretive about Hannah’s condition. This, they say,
is the only way that things might change. “I was one of those people who
thought that people take drugs for enjoyment,” Kate says. “Well, everything
I’ve witnessed in the past 18 months shows me there isn’t any enjoyment in
it. Once, in the Priory, Hannah told me that she doesn’t understand this
world and cannot stand the pain of it. I think that’s when I realised that
she was ill, deeply troubled and very damaged.
“We tried our best to prevent [the overdose] from happening, and the last
thing you expect is to have the bank working against you. I just want to
highlight how irresponsible, how potentially dangerous, it is to give
vulnerable people credit like this.
“I live in the now, I don’t look forward. I just think that I have a disabled
daughter and she may get better, but she may not. If she does, it will take
years. Until then, my life is not mine, it is hers.”
Banks can’t discriminate
Eric Leenders, executive director of the British Bankers’ Association
Should an individual be censored to play a full part in society and all that
society offers? Only the individual can answer that. A person can use a
situation such as borrowing to their advantage and there is little that bank
staff can do. In terms of opportunism in funding an addiction, through petty
crime or whatever, it is the same. The individual presents an external
persona of someone who is a responsible borrower.
Banks can’t do anything in law to discriminate against individuals so they
must be careful what kind of information they commit to their files and how
this information is used. Twelve months on [from, for example, NatWest being
told Hannah was a heroin addict], that individual could convince staff that
they are in a different place and can manage credit.
You can make this kind of decision only on a case-by-case basis. On occasion
the judgments made by bank staff might be inappropriate. However, it can be
incredibly difficult to decipher the evidence a borrower can present to you.
Most banks are responsible lenders and most individuals are responsible
borrowers, in 95 per cent of cases. Credit is one of the most heavily
regulated products in the UK, and the UK has some of the toughest
regulations in Europe.
To tell someone that there are funds available for them if they need it is
different from someone deciding to take it. Just because something is
available doesn’t mean that you should take advantage of it. Individuals
must ask themselves: am I borrowing this for something I need, do I
understand the product that I am using to buy it, and will I be able to pay
back the amount? Most people recognise that if you don’t need something, you
shouldn’t buy it.
Mistakes will always be made
Malcolm Hurlston, chief executive of the Consumer Credit Counselling
Service
We would argue that banks should keep information of this kind on record for
six years, after which time the customer should have the chance to review
it. Six years is the same period as county court judgments, and roughly the
length of time credit reference agencies hold information about individuals.
We certainly aren’t against people being offered credit. It is a good thing
for people to receive different offers. Some people get into difficulties,
usually because of the ending of a relationship or job, or health problems.
A small number shouldn’t be offered credit at all. The Government maintains
a register, the registry of judgments, orders and crimes, which goes back
six years, for this purpose.
There is pressure on financial institutions to be increasingly financially
inclusive. We think there is actually less bad debt than there was a year
ago. We received 40 per cent more calls to our helpline this year than last
year, but we think this is because people are calling it sooner. There is no
reason why bad debt should be increasing — inflation is low, employment is
high and the economy is generally stable.
Banks will always make mistakes in lending. They have gone through a bad phase
recently. There is now a lot more automated information at their disposal;
they have relied too much on it and ignored the personal touch. This was up
to about 18 months ago, when they realised that this approach needed to be
supplemented. Also they are making more money on interest payments and fees,
which means that they have an incentive to lend to people on the fringes of
society.
A statement from NatWest
Since Kate contacted The Times , NatWest bank has agreed to write
off Hannah’s debt. The bank says:
NatWest would like to apologise to Miss Mayne and her family for the confusion
caused by their dealings with the bank in recent months, and has every
sympathy with their current situation. We are unable to find any records on
our systems that indicate Miss Mayne’s personal circumstances.
Miss Mayne requested an extension to her overdraft in October and accepted the
amount offered. All overdraft applications are subject to strict criteria
and checks, with an emphasis on ensuring that the customer would not be
entering into a commitment that they could not meet. NatWest takes its
responsibilities in this regard very seriously as it is neither in our
customers’ nor our own interest to encourage anyone into debt that they
cannot afford to repay.
We have a clearly defined process to help customers experiencing financial
hardship; expert staff initiate contact and work with them to resolve their
problems. As an adult customer and a sole account holder, Miss Mayne has
autonomy over her account. On entering the branch to request an extension to
her overdraft in October, Miss Mayne would have been in effect overriding
any existing instruction from herself.
With regard to Miss Mayne not qualifying for the loan she applied for, we can
advise that loan applications are subject to individual circumstances and
there had been a change to Miss Mayne’s financial circumstances relating to
her income and expenditure. Based on the information that Miss Mayne
supplied at the time, NatWest was unable to approve the application for
lending. NatWest takes its responsibilities in this regard very seriously.
Through further dialogue with Miss Mayne over the past week we have reached an
appropriate resolution with her and her mother.
Consumer Credit Counselling Service: 0800 1381111 National Drugs Helpline:
0800 776600
I feel very sorry for this girl and her family, but it is also clear that the benifits system is simply a means by which families abrogate responsibility for other family members. How can an addict be on benefits unless they are also demonstrably incapacitated by other mental illness? Moreover, the bank is deliberately preying on the parents, not this poor girl who quite obviously would be unlikely to repay the loan.
Arnold Ward, Weybridge, Surrey, UK
Hannah can have an account at the Post Office into which her DHSS money can be transfered and which she cannot over draw. Hannah cannot be protected from herself by the bank unless the parents refuse to help with the loan and a county court order is taken out against her. Then the credit agencies will report her uncreditworthy. I think that will last for 5 years. In that event she can have a basic bank account with no overdraft facilities and obviously no capacity to get a loan. She may also learn for herself the consequences of her actions. I also suggest Promis in Kent.
Carlie, Edinburgh, UK
Hi Kate & Hannah,
I am Susan and, together with a friend Marilyn, I run a support group for families who are bereaved through drugs/alcohol abuse. We have both sadly lost our beautiful son's to Heroin, my son Luke was aged 19 and Marilyn's son Marcus 22. We are both only too well aware how difficult it is to cope with your child whilst they are going down the slippery slope of drug abuse. As a parent it is the most horrific of situations to be in, you love your child very dearly and want to help them but there is very little help and support out there.
Luke & Marcus were both loving, intelligent and kind individuals who got caught up in the sordid world of drugs. Marilyn and I are very proud of our sons and how hard they tried to come off drugs, it was a long struggle for both families over several years. Unfortunately we lost the battle.
We sincerely hope that Kate and Hannah win their fight! Good luck and take care!
Lots of love and empathy
Susan/Marilyn x
Susan Garner, Harrogate, England
I can identify with Kate and understand fully her dilema with the Bank. My own daughter, also an addict with a family was able to obtain a substanially large loan from a Bank for a business. The business failed due to her addiction and because of the vast amount of overdraft facility available which also continued to enable her drug addiction. This debt today has been swallowed up into an even larger loan via a mortgage on her property. I can also see the Bank's point of view, in that they are not accountable for an adult customer.
Jen Braham, Marchwood nr southampton, england
It seems to me that people are not asking the right questions as to whether Natwest could be held responsible for affording this woman credit.
If the agreement between Hannah, her mother and the bank had been more formalized, it seems that Natwest's offer of credit could be illegitimate.
Is there not a way for Hannah to formally waive all rights to her account to her mother for a specific period of time? In the US, an account holder can voluntarily waive their right to funds via "Power of Attorney", to another individual, if they feel they are a danger to themselves, or somehow mentally incapacitated.
Although I agree that a person is ultimately responsible for their own actions, there should be a mechanism in place to hold a bank, or other financial institution accountable for predatory lending.
John, NJ, USA
I have nothing to say but to express my admiration for Kate Mayne and her husband. I can only imagine the horror their daughter's "disability" has given them. It is sometimes overlooked that it is possible to eat three square meals a day and still have terrible challenges to overcome. Its not much I know but I hope this gives them a little support
david, miami, florida
Hi, It's Bonnie again. I thought I try to respond ;-).
When an addict is choosing self-destructive behaviour naturally their loved ones want to step in and stop it. This means controlling aspects of their lives to protect them. Totally understandable. But how can the bank possibly respect this? Once someone is 18 they become legally able to choose, even self destructive behaviour. I don't know many teen addicts but I know a LOT of abusive parents. Warring, manipulative, childish, even DRUG ADDICTED parents - are you saying that if those parents called up the bank and said 'my daughter is an addict - let ME control their money', the bank is right to believe them and close the account? Any slanderer, abusive ex-partner, or manipulative family member would be able to control someone's life! Can't people see that this is why, painful as it is to parents of addicts, the bank can only take the word of the (adult) person's life it is? Or else don't call over 18's adults.
Bonnie, Liverpool, uk
Also,
I still believe the parent's are wrong to bring the bank into this discussion. The bank gave her money which she blew on drugs, are the parent's (who have given her money) also to blame? Don't make this a 'bank fails middle class family' story. It's barely true and it looks like blame shifting of the "I'm not a racist, but" variety. Make this a 'drug addiction affects all, regardless of class' story. If that is true then let it speak for itself. The bank stuff is a distraction and feeds into the feeling that if this family were a little less middle class, this story would not have been written.
Bonnie, Liverpool, uk
No parent can be prepared for the nightmare of a son or daughter addicted to drugs or alcohol or with a mental illness. No parent knows the right way to deal with it, you always feel guilt and blame. What did we do wrong, you say. We had to sit on the doorstep of the local Sussex psychiatric unit for 4 hours and beg my severely ill son be taken in, because the doctor said "everyone has the right to be odd" and did not take us seriously. My son was later diagnosed with severe schizophrenia. He now has a substance abuse problem which he thinks helps him cope with life. Care "in the community", now renamed "social inclusion" is appallingly inadequate and disjointed. There is far more care and help for those with learning difficulties for example. The new Government idea is that everyone should be out of hospital, coping for themselves, regardless of how ill or confused or vulnerable they are (saves money, of course, what are a few deaths).
Jean, Sussex,
This story has made me feel very sad. I’ve always been a great believer in the fact that people should have responsibility for their actions and still believe that. But I have also dealt with friends with mental illness. I think it is clear from the story that the mother of this girl knows that she has made mistakes in the past when trying to deal with her daughters addition and she will surly learn from them. But I do believe that the parents and the Hannah must take full responsibility for her actions and outcomes.
I think it is a common misconception that banks should ‘care’ about customers, they don’t, and they care about making money can we please not forget that the NatWest is a business, with an aim to make money.
I do get the feeling from this story that maybe her parents should have spend more time (in her younger years) to make sure she was well educated and not vulnerable to the dangers of drugs and drink. I Wish Hannah all the best in her future.
David, london,
This story highlights an important fact that is often overlooked by society: drugs affect everyone, even the middle classes.
What is this story really about? The daughter? Not really. The focus is on how dreadful it is for the mother. I agree, the chaos and distress caused by addiction of any kind is awful, but it is no more awful for a middle-class mother of two living in a Georgian house in a nice street in Brighton than it is for a homeless guy living in Leeds. I work with drug services and I can tell you that drugs destroy indiscriminately, regardless of class.I wish Hannah all the best and I hope that her treatment works, as I hope it works for everyone that tries to get clean.
Further, Natwest should not be held responsible for their actions regarding this case. The credit-bases society in which we live is at the root of the problem. It is the very makeup of society, of which the girl’s own mother is a complicit part, that failed Hannah. That is the really sad truth.
Jake, Eastbourne,
I have every sympathy with Hannah and her family having gone through a very similar experience with my daughter.
The system does let young people with addiction problems down, and banks give the impression of only being interested in making money.
My own daughter had serious social phobia problems that she "dealt with" by drinking, needing her alcohol "bubble" to even leave the house.
After many of the kind of episodes related by Hannahs mum, and trying desperately just about anything to help my daughter we came across NLP. It has changed her life, and while it does not work for everyone it is worth looking at.
Never stop trying.
HEATHER, Horsham,
nat wesxt did the same for my son and i told them he was using the so called 'car loan' on drugs and was unemployed. There response was to send a demand for full payment otherwise they would take legal action they would not accept an arrangement. He is now with HSBC and they have also given him an overdraft knowing that no money whatsoever goes into his account to pay anything off the amount owing. I am at my wits end and like your writer have paid out thousands of pounds.
I cried on reading the story as I could well have written it myself right down to the last sentence.
jean, liverpool, england
Wow! The arrogance, condenscension and judgemental attitude of some of the posters commenting on this story is just breathtaking. You must all be so strong and live such perfect lives!
Oh, actually, no, I take that back. If you really *were* perfect, you'd be able to exhibit some simple human compassion.
This girl's mother is begging for help and admitting to the mistakes she knows she has made in dealing with this dreadful problem - a problem most of us here have no experience of whatsoever - and all you can do is slag her off and label her daughter a "spoilt little rich girl". Are you close personal friends of the family, that you feel in a position to make such a character judgment?
N Butler, London, UK
The real issue here is not about the bank giving money to Hannah. It is not the bank's fault that she is an addict and if they didn't give her the money she would get it some other way. The real issue is the pain and devastation caused by addiction, not only to the addict but to their family.
My younger brother is a drug addict, alcoholic and gambling addict. At the moment he is in a halfway house but will be out in a few weeks. He's trying to beat his addictions but his councilors are not optimistic and have told us in graphic detail what could happen in the future.
People who think that this problem only affects a certain section of society are not living in the real world. We are a wealthy and well educated family but have had our lives destroyed by this. Early intervention is the key -and that requires close cooperation between schools, police, social services, health services and families. It is up to our governments to provide the financial and support resources to allow for this
J McCarthy, Dublin, Ireland
This story has made me feel very sad. I’ve always been a great believer in the fact that people should have responsibility for their actions and still believe that. But I have also dealt with friends with mental illness. I think it is clear from the story that the mother of this girl knows that she has made mistakes in the past when trying to deal with her daughters addition and she will surly learn from them. But I do believe that the parents and the Hannah must take full responsibility for her actions and outcomes.
I think it is a common misconception that banks should ‘care’ about customers, they don’t, and they care about making money can we please not forget that the NatWest is a business, with an aim to make money.
I do get the feeling from this story that maybe her parents should have spend more time (in her younger years) to make sure she was well educated and not vulnerable to the dangers of drugs and drink. I Wish Hannah all the best in her future.
David, london,
Surely it's the fault of teachers, catholics and/or muslims. They usually get blamed for everything that's wrong.
Unfortunately we have another instance of people trying to blame everyone else when the girl and maybe her family are at fault.
A Thomas, Durham,
Being a close friend of the familys I am both touched and angered by the range of reactions. For those of you throwing words at Kate and Hannah, have a think first . . .
Have you ever done anything in your life you wish you hadnt yet it was too late to change?
Have you ever witnesse a loved one in such a terrifying state that you would give them your life to ensure they were ok?
Some of you moan that with the parents having good jobs they are able to pay the loan. Have you ever thought that with the stress and heavy lifestyle Kate now leads she may have to take time from her job. Or maybe their money gets spent on rehab to gain back their precious daughter they miss? Kate may have paid drug dealers, but that doesnt mean she agrees or accepts Hannah using heroin. The thought of what may happen to Hannah if she doesn't is far worse.
If your lucky enough to have had a great life so far then Im pleased for you, just remember that others arn't so lucky but they are still worth a chance.
Natalie Byne, Chichester, England
reading this article, kate is just looking for a scape goat. She blames the bank, she blames the government, she should look closer to home and accept responsibility. How is it Natwests fault? if a customer asks for an increase in overdraft, how are they to know she will go out and spend it on drugs? they are not psychic. Imagen the headlines if they refused her an overdraft because she looked like an undesireable? natwest would be on the front page for descrimination. They just cant win.The lack of boundaries and rules have left her running riot.
emily, hastings, uk
It's not up to the bank to control a person's lifestyle - no matter how damaging it might be. Can't you just see the headlines if they had refused - 'Bank refuses loan to depressed teenager' Her mother should have had the account closed.
R Hill, Belfast, N. Ireland
The Times - A daily lament for the nasty, unfair things that happen to the middle classes.
This is a very sad story, but it isn't upsetting because Hannah's anorak doesn't fit in with the affluent surrounds of her family home, or because between cleaning up after her daughter and bankrolling her habit, Kate goes to fashion shows and eats very nice lunches. Any kind of self destructive behaviour is sad, irrespective of class or background.
Hannah should be the focus of this story, but she's not. It reads like a manual for juggling a busy professional life with the inconveniences caused by having a junkie for a daughter. Rule no. 1: Blame everyone else before cancelling one of your business lunches.
Maybe if Kate hadn't felt obliged to pay off her daughter's debts in the first instance the bank's record would not have shown her to be an acceptable risk for a substantial overdraft.
Han, Brighton, uk
Whilst I sympathise with the family in this story, and from personal experience know that banks do lend to those who really do not have the means to repay the loan, I do not understand why any family should feel that they have to repay a bank loan given to a family member. Families are obviously responding to the desperation of the family member. It is the bank's responsibility to recover the loan, and perhaps if there were sufficient defaulters, banks just might begin to understand that they cannot continue to make irresponsible loans. Personally I am constantly receiving unsolicited offers of loans from my bank - which I consider junk bank mail and toss in the bin, thus adding to the paper rubbish mountain. There are bank accounts which do not allow overdrafts, and it is possible to stipulate this when opening an account, just as it is possible to stipulate a maximum amount to be withdrawn at any one time. For the banks to disclaim responsibility is just naive.
Jean, London,
Posh mum with a great story. She'll be a drugs czar or heading up a Quango before long.
Alan Bento, Margate, England
Eric Leenders - "Banks can’t do anything in law to discriminate against individuals". What on earth? If this is correct I shall walk into Coutts this afternoon and demand that they give me exactly the same banking facilities as they make available to the Duke of Westminster. How ridiculous.
Robert, Primrose Hill,
Although I can feel some sympathy for the parents of this drug addict, I feel none at all for the daughter who appears to have brought all her problems on herself, including those with her overdraft.
I wonder exactly how many drug addicts are getting such generous hand-outs from the State - having made no contributions towards benefits themselves. After 44 years of working and contributing to my pension, I now see I'm exactly 44.00 pounds a month worse off than this one!
Pat Thornton, Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria
There are so many absurd things about this story I don't know where to begin! Firstly, I think it's crazy that a bank would give a teenager w/ no real income that much overdraft and I can't even get a normal bank account b/c I'm from America despite my great credit history and steady income! Also, no one made this girl spend that money on drugs and since when is it the bank's responsibility to act as a parent for its customers??
Have these people ever heard of personal responsibility? In the end the decisions a person makes are THEIR decisions - whether they are made by someone who is healthy or not. People are not going to get better and have independent lives if they can keep blaming everyone else for their problems and never deal with them on their own.
Arlene, Edinburgh,
Natwest *ARE* responsible. They've given away money despite having a record on their screens telling them not to do so.
Paul Heyes, Sheffield, United Kingdom
My 23 yr old brother is a schizophrenic who also has an addiction to cannabis and heroin. He has spent the last 6yrs in and out of hospital, often enduring the physical and mental pain of psychotic episodes. He has no concept of 'real life' and relies whole-heartedly on others for support and guidance. When he is fortunate enough to be out of hospital, he lives on benefits in housing provided by the mental health 'support' system - although that in itself is a farce. He was given a £2,500 loan by Halifax despite openly revealing that the only income he received was through benefits and that he was not, and never had been, in gainful employment. He is now, obviously, being charged interest and is unable to make any repayments at all on the loan. My family have had to absorb the charges while we argue with the banking ombudsman over Halifax's actions, and have been treated with disdain by all Halifax employees with whom we have had the misfortune to try and discuss a solution.
Natasha Coupe, London,
Another spoilt little rich girl getting no attention from her career obsessed parents so turns to drugs, no one to blame except for the silly girl who took them.
claire, wakefield, west yorkshire
I almost forgot whatthe article was about, I was so absorbed in this heartbreaking story of a family's tragedy.
My family has been through a similar problem but with alcohol rather than drugs and I was moved to tears by Kate's continuing and dignified struggle to help her afflicted daughter. So much sounded famikiar to me in what they have suffered. My family, after a long and horrible period, have come through it now and my heart goes out to them. I hope Hannah will eventually recover and is able to lead a better life. I hope she appreciates her mother - she sounds like a super mum!
Ebony, Barnsley,
I empathises entirely. I have a son with a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia and drug abuse. He has been sectioned since 2002. He has never had income other than benefits yet he managed to obtain a loan of £2000 from the only bank with whom he has ever had an account. There was never a way in which he would be able to repay this and the loan has now increased and is in the hands of a debt collecting agency. I tried to complain to the bank on his behalf but they said he had made a fraudulent statement that he was in full time employment. His interpretation of the question 'Do you have regular income? ' was that his benefits meant that he did!I have now lodged a complaint with the Financial Ombudsman and in the meantime we repay £30 per month from his benefits.
There are many other parallels between Hannah's story and that of my son. Being sectioned does not guarantee safety or appropriate support. The Mental Health service is understaffed, under resourced and fails in its duty of care
M Coupe, Edinburgh, Scotland
This is such a sad story.
I know it has changed my perception of drug users - I have always viewed them as scummy estate-dwellers (I know that's an awful thing to think, but I'm just being honest).
NatWest should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for having such a shambolic system of record keeping.
The mother's reaction is completely understandable - NatWest would have had blood on their hands had her daughter died from an overdose.
There's really no point in blaming this girl for her addiction.
Yes, she made the choice to try heroin the first time. It was a mistake, and one she will pay for for the rest of her life. Now she has no choice but to keepo using, until she gets the help she needs.
I'm grateful that nobody offered me heroin when I was a troubled teenager. I can't say that I know what my decision would have been.
I think that her mother is so brave for speaking out about this issue, and she is in my prayers.
Alexandra, London,
Most of the comments on here just prove how naive the people are who wrote them, and that they've never had to live with someone they love who has a heroine addiction.
Hannah obviously has mental problems, and as such should be admitted to an asylum where she can be kept somewhere safe and looked after by people who understand her.
Blaming her family for her situation is outrageous and incredibly narrow-minded.
And the fact that she was able to get an over-draft at all in her situation suggests the bank should look into this event and how it happened, just to make sure it can't happen again.
Annelise, Belgium,
The problem with a liberal society is that it balks at any kind of control from authority, then blames the same authorities when the conquences turn up.
I think its rich of Hannah's mum to blame Natwest for lending her the money when she does the same.
Her belief that decriminalisation of heroin will solve the problem is very mistaken for lots of reasons. does anyone really think that the barons and dealers are just going to sit down and retrain as Computer operators or nurses?, will the conuntry have unlimited resources to feed addicts, will it keep up with every new drug that comes onto the market?)
usually no one forces people who go onto drug addicts to take that first taste. we have to instill in childdren at an early age the dangers of drugs. This is a problem when drugs are celebrated in the media but it seems that politians also have to endorse drug use to prove that they are in touch with the people.
whatever happened to the campaign JUST SAY NO?
phollie, Bromley,
The sooner people realise that BANKS are just USURERS the better. I agree with the Muslim view that USURERS should be outlawrd and what did Jesus do to the MONEYLENDERS in the temple ? He simply cast them out.
Donald Legget, WEYBRIDGE, Surrey KT13 0JN
"We have 'Nanny' Government, shall we have now 'nanny' banks?"
Look, there's a difference between being a 'nanny' and being a responsible person. It seems these days people are far too willing to duck out of taking responsibility for their actions. It would have been easy for the bank to refuse to give Hannah credit on the basis of her income, and therefore it would not be illegally discriminatory at all should she have kicked up a fuss.
As it is, the bank is irresponsible for giving credit to someone on benefits, because there would be no way for anyone on such an income to be able to repay that debt. Not everyone can rely on the Bank of Mum and Dad to bail them out.
rjl, Aberystwyth,
Not all Times readers are as selfish several above. I'm hoping Hannah can deal with her issues and lives a long and happy life. Nat west were just being a normal bank and don't see people as individuals, just profit and loss. Thankfully at the moment we haven’t lost Hannah. We all need help sometimes and Hannah has all my support and best wishes for the future. No-one is worthless, however much money or privilege they may or may not have. Too many people think of drugs as "just part of today's society". I'm sick of the stupid supposedly fun comments in all media portraying drug taking like cocaine and hash as a normal everyday thing. All drugs are a gateway to stronger more addictive and damaging ones. Hannah Good luck
Alan, newmarket, suffolk
There seems to be an assumption in the article that because both parents have high flying careers and there is no material deprivation, it is remarkable that the family suffers these kind of problems. Given that the root cause here seems to be emotional, it doesn't seem in the least remarkable to me (but then I have never been accused of being politically correct).
Phil, Warwick, UK
You may as well blame driving test examiners for passing kids who get killed on the roads.
Personal responsibility - Hannah's drug addiction is her problem, the world can try to help her but if it drops the ball and her problem deepens then it's still her problem.
Drug addict gets money to buy drugs by any means possible - Shock!
Dave St Peters, London,
You are missing the point, Bonnie. At no point does the article blame Natwest for Hannah's addiction. You (luckily) have clearly never known anyone trying to help a deeply troubled family member. I have, and Hannah and her family have my sympathy.
The article mentions Natwest because they had agreed with Hannah that they would not give her an overdraft. The fact that they then did amounts to an error of judgment. But we should take a long hard look at why banks try so hard to push loans onto people who cannot afford them (answer: because that is where they make money). For example, I asked for a credit card with a £500 limit for use on the internet. I just received a letter saying that my limit is now £7000 (which I cannot afford to pay off each month if I use it). I won't use it, but then I don't have a drug addiction. This is a bad practice in my opinion, particularly at a time when the spiraling levels of personal debt in this country are of such concern.
Anna, London,
Wow 440 a month in benefits and a junkie also. I will like to come to England.
bers, pqris, france
There is a very good treatment centre in Nonnington, Kent called The Promis Recovery Centre. This place will offer Hannah was she needs in a supportive and loving way. If Hannah's parents read this please contact the centre. This centre does succeed where others fail. Someone close to me has benefitted.
Alice , London, U K
How familiar Kate's story is, all those awful feelings of despair with no-one to help. My daughter followed the same path as Hannah and my husband eventually went to the manager at our Lloyds bank who agreed to put on her file that she was not allowed to touch her account (this after her shoplifting, forging my signature on cheques). However, a few weeks later she 'chats up' a young clerk in the bank, enabling her to run up an overdraft of a few thousand pounds on which she was then charged interest. The debt collectors came round, removing her bed on one occasion, and I eventually went with her to the CAB who arranged for her to 'pay the debt off'' at £1 per month. All this money was spent on drugs.
anon, ,
Please enlighten me. This is not a comment on the Natwest who cannot be held responsible for the behaviour of a customer, whatever her mother may think! I am querying the fact that a heroin addict is claiming income support and a 'disability allowance'. I appreciate this girl had a childhood disability, but surely heroin addiction is not treated as a disability by the DWP? I assume the girl is not working or seeking employment., so the State is helping to fuel her addiction.
Is this yet another instance of the 'Nanny State' gone mad?
Marion Wood, Bath,
Natwest did the right thing, the girl would of just stolen or commited crime to feed her habit, and other people would of suffered this way the bank just made her paid for her addiction instead of her stealing from the public.
Furthermore if it was legal the government could of helped her off it, and she wouldn't be in debt, end of the day she did this all to herself, banks are here to make money not give drug counciling sessions..
Adam Webb, MK, UK
Bonnie, try actually reading the article before commenting on it. It maintains, quite specifically, that the addiction is NOT the fault of NatWest, so your whole thesis is complete garbage.
The *overdose* is the fault of NatWest, because they already knew they were not supposed to supply Hannah with money but did so anyway.
Paul Heyes, Sheffield, United Kingdom
Bonnie, Liverpool - I think you got caught up in the start of the article - the focus of the headline will grab your attention of course. But read the article.....
It is made clear that the parents know they've done wrong in helping and there is even a sentence saying that they know Natwest is not at fault for the addiction in the first place.
Natwest is at fault - it lent when it shouldn't have done - they were even told not to by the account holder. Systems should not erase crucial information after some time. The banks certainly keep hold of debt info long enough, why not other information?
Helen Bowles, Coventry,
I am sure that every one would agree that financial instituations have a degree of responsibility to ensure that the individual that it has supplied credit to has the means to pay it back. However, the focus of this article is wrong - to suggest that the overdose was a direct consequence of the overdraft is ridiculous.
At the very worst (as Bonnie suggests), this is an administrative error and the parents anger is misplaced. They should focus their resources and energy elsewhere and not at the bank.
Whilst a child with a heroid addiction is a horrendous situation for any parent to be confronted with “If she overdoses, I will hold NatWest responsible”, is preposterous.
Andrew, Glasgow,
This story brought tears to my eyes. Please please can some doctor reading this get Hannah the help she so desperately needs. And teach her to live again.
Lindsay, Bristol,
Why do heroin addicts always try to blame other people for their suffering, when in reality they inflict their suffering on other people? This girl sounds intelligent, privileged and healthy - yet she voluntarily chose to throw everything away by allowing herself to slide gradually into harder and harder drugs. It's an unnecessary and tragic situation, but I can't feel any sympathy for anyone who goes down this road - even the most naive and stupid teenager knows the risks of heroin these days.
Neil S, Glasgow, Scotland
The main problem here is that this girl is a heroin addict, not the overdraft she was given. Yes, it is daft if banks are giving people on benefits that kind of overdraft and yes they should have cut her off as requested, but people make mistakes in their job (it's not as bad as cutting someone off from money who really needs it).
This girl is a heroin addict, and that is not Natwest's fault. Considering her own mother has given her money for the stuff, I'm surprised she's raging at the bank.
LW, London,
Banks give out overdrafts for the same reason that heroin suppliers give free samples. It gets the punter hooked.
Frank Upton, Solihull,
err Bonnie perhaps you should read the 7th paragraph which begins
"The first thing to be made clear is that NatWest is not to blame for Hannah’s heroin addiction, and the Mayne family knows that"
just a thought.
Phil, Aberdeen, UK
It is very sad for Hannah to have chosen such path of the addiction. However, it seems, 'the Goverment's Nanny 'stance on most of the issues has projected on younger generations which shows a lack of taking responsibility for their own actions. Hannah applied for the loan which has been approved. it was her choice to spend it on heroin. If Natwest did not approve her application, then it would be m their fault again for not approving it. We have 'Nanny' Goverment, shall we have now 'nanny' banks?
Helena, Altrincham, Manchester
I suspect that NatWest is not alone in extending loans to young customers that they know full well cannot be repaid by the customer. They are, in effect, lending to the parents - knowing that, after a few harsh letters, it will be the parents who settle the debt. And then the cycle repeats itself.
Charles, London, England
Right. Heroin addiction is always someone else's fault, in this case Natwests. The Bank raised Hannah, fed her drugs and didn't show her 'tough love'. Thus it is all Natwest's fault and not the parents. Why is this article ven about Natwest?? Her parents clearly have enought money to pay it off and while rich (actually most) parents bankroll their children's spending habits, why won't a bank give money to 18 yr olds?
Btw, these stories are always the exception! I have to point out that I'm 21 and until uni, no one gave me any money, and the bank always refused to extend my overdraft, even though I had a guaranteed income (my student loan) to pay it back.
Maybe the parents should spend less time bitching about a tiny admin mistake and more time looking at their own family. I'm not saying the drug addiction is their fault, but if it's not theirs, how the hell is it Natwest's?????
Bonnie, Liverpool, UK
I wonder if Toby has had first hand experience of a family member with drug problems? My 34 year old sister has been a heroin addict for some years and it has led to a certain ambivalence in our family towards her drug taking. As Toby says, withdrawal is not pretty, but it is NOT the only way to deal with it - certainly it has failed for my sister 8 times in the last 2.5 years. Tough love, expensive therapy, lockdown... we've tried it all and you get to the point where actually funding drug taking yourself is preferable to watching someone you care about turn into a desperate criminal in order to get their fix.
My sister was also given a £10,000 loan by her bank, unquestioned, when it must have been blatantly obvious to them that more money was consistently going out of her account than was going in. While they cannot be responsible for my sisters' problems it makes me so mad that they don't even challenge how such a loan would be paid back.
Chris, Reading,
Dear Kate & Hannah
Please please try NA narcotics anonymous. I have been in the AA for 8 years now. I was locked up by a very caring doctor for a while in Eastbourne hospital because things had got bad in the nineties. Everything spiralled out of control, I had a great business a family a beautiful house but drink got me, I lost it all. It took me a long time for things to improve- I still have depression problems. Heck I even ran off to south america- for 7 years. But things are much better- one day at a time- I have a good job and a wife- and the love of my son possibly my daughter in future. I return to England in May. It may not solve your problems right away but slowly- try try- or read "the big book" AA. Better still get Hannah to. Love.
Peter, caracas, venezuela
A very heart breaking article. I have lived in Chichester and also lived on an exclusive road in Brighton and often wondered what the 'other' inhabitants behind the big electric gates were like. I don't envy your life Kate, but at the same time I admire your courage, your obvious love for your daughter and your tenacity. I wish you the best of luck for the future of your family.
Marieke Biddle, Gomersal, West Yorkshire
Hmmmm - her parents gave her money to buy drugs because her withdrawal symptoms made them upset? And then they of course find some "disability" on which to blame their child's wickedness? Give me a break. Withdrawal is not pretty, but that's the only way to do it. Pandering to a middle class brat who obviously does not respect all her parents have done for her is not the answer.
Toby, Sydney,