Published decisions
1,681
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Advantage Insurance Company Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,681
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
46.6%
783 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,681 published decisions involving Advantage Insurance Company Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,681
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
46.6%
783 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 10 Aug 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
1,681
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
46.6%
783 upheld decisions
Leading product
Insurance
1,052 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
186 tagged decisions
Advantage Insurance Company Limited appears in 1,681 published decisions in this corpus. 46.6% 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 1,052 decisions and an upheld rate of 49.0%.
Advantage Insurance Company Limited's decision trail runs from 2013 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, Advantage Insurance Company Limited appeared in 35 published decisions with an upheld rate of 37.1%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Advantage Insurance Company Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Conc, Disp 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 set out above, I uphold Mr K’s complaint. Advantage Insurance Company Limited must: • pay the lease company the required amount to fully settle the lease agreement (as set out above); • pay Mr K £266.
View source decisionFor the reasons given above, my final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr A to accept or reject my decision before 28 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons I stated above, I am not upholding this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr C to accept or reject my decision before 27 August 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I uphold Miss A’s complaint. To put things right I direct Advantage Insurance Company Limited to do as I’ve set out above.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr F to accept or reject my decision before 24 August 2026.
View source decision