Published decisions
1,794
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,794
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
48.8%
875 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,794 published decisions involving Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,794
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
48.8%
875 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 28 Jul 2026
How to use this page
The top-line cards show scale and outcome context. The ranked view and representative decisions show where the slice is concentrated and what the published decision set actually looks like.
Published decisions
1,794
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
48.8%
875 upheld decisions
Leading product
Insurance
1,701 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
99 tagged decisions
Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited appears in 1,794 published decisions in this corpus. 48.8% of those decisions were upheld, which gives a public view of how often complaints involving this firm ended in a fully upheld outcome in the final published set.
Insurance is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 1,701 decisions and an upheld rate of 49.0%.
Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited's decision trail runs from 2014 to 2026. That range gives enough public history to see whether complaint exposure has been broad-based or concentrated into certain years.
In the latest year represented here, Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited appeared in 89 published decisions with an upheld rate of 30.3%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Icobs, Insurance Act 2015, Consumer Credit Act 1974, and others are the most visible precedent signals in the firm’s published decisions. That gives extra context on the rules and fairness arguments appearing most often around the firm.
Representative cases
5 examples shown
For the reasons I have given I uphold this complaint. I require Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited to; • Increase the settlement offer for Miss T’s car to £15,387 This means an amount of £936,67 should be paid.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs K to accept or reject my decision before 25 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons given above, my final decision is that I do not uphold the complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr N and Mrs N to accept or reject my decision before 24 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons above, I am not upholding this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr S to accept or reject my decision before 21 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons above I have decided to uphold this complaint in part. Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited must pay Mr D a further £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience it caused him.
View source decision