First thing first
Like other people said, no matter which path you choose to follow, you have to test. There are no correct blank slate answers, and most of the times testing will tell you how to mix different approaches.
So, on to my answer:
yes, natural language is good
Interfaces based on natural languages tend to be good because of their conversational language and clear message that eliminates ambiguity (as long as it is WELL DONE. Otherwise, ambiguity is a real issue. However, I don't see any BIG problem with yours, but it could be improved).
So, I think you're on the good track on this subject. However, I can see a couple things you should take care of:
Avoid unnecessary information
This screen shows some information that adds to friction and cognitive load, without any apparent benefit. Take this:
No brokers have locked accounts
OK, thank you system. It didn't add anything at all, the system is working as expected, everything is fine so.... why add an alert on "we're going fine captain?". A different thing would be
8 brokers have locked accounts
That would be informational and something I'd need to act upon. This is a good alert, and I need to take action.
Also, pay attention to the way you wrote this in natural language (remember the well done part mentioned above? )
No brokers have locked accounts
This is a bit ambiguous, and at a first sight an user could just scan this message like "brokers have locked accounts" or "locked accounts" since this is the important part of the message. Also, "No" should be replaced by "0". (in fact, 0 or none shouldn't even be here, but let's assume you want to use it for layout consistency)
So, what about this?
0 brokers have locked accounts
and then
8 brokers have locked accounts
will teach the user what to scan at first sight, which is the NUMBER at the beginning.
So, we're going close, but still ambiguous and it can be improved. I'm assuming they can't "own" a locked account. Instead, they have an account, which the system can modify for any specific reason, including locking the account. So, we could go with something like
8 brokers had their accounts locked. See details.
Now, the system informs the user that SOMEONE has SOMETHING but the system performed an action over it and you should take an action as well. This is the core of HCI: computer and humans interacting. In your case, a broker (human) owns a digital asset (account in system). The system (computer) performed an action and now requests another (human) user to take an action as well. And we can express all that in natural language! See how it could work based on semantic blocks:
8
brokers
had their accounts
locked
. See details
.
which can be decomposed into:
necessary information(number)
who
what
system action
user interaction
so now we could easily add option into the system by changing semantic blocks. For example:
3 admin users had their permissions upgraded. See details.
In short: it's OK to use natural language, and strongly recommended. However, it's not as simple as it sounds, there's a whole area of semiotics in HCI, so it's a bit hard to get it right from the first attempt
Legibility
Other than the above, I think your interface is a bit hard to read. Maybe teh thin font, maybe the background.... I don't know, I feel the load is a bit high. Maybe try testing a version like this against a cleaner one and see how it goes