Published decisions
2,985
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Ageas Insurance Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
2,985
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
42.4%
1,266 upheld decisions
Page summary
2,985 published decisions involving Ageas Insurance Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
2,985
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
42.4%
1,266 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 06 Mar 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
2,985
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
42.4%
1,266 upheld decisions
Leading product
Insurance (excluding PPI)
1,787 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
429 tagged decisions
Ageas Insurance Limited appears in 2,985 published decisions in this corpus. 42.4% 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 (excluding PPI) is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 1,787 decisions and an upheld rate of 41.8%.
Ageas Insurance 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, Ageas Insurance Limited appeared in 7 published decisions with an upheld rate of 14.3%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Ageas Insurance Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Icobs, Disp, Insurance Act 2015, 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’ve explained, my final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint. I don’t direct Ageas Insurance Limited to do any more in response to this complaint.
View source decisionFor the reasons I have given above, my final decision is that I uphold this complaint. I direct Ageas Insurance Limited to resolve the complaint in the way I have set out above.
View source decisionFor the reasons set out above, my final decision is that I don’t uphold Mr D’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr D to accept or reject my decision before 5 March 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision I that I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr M to accept or reject my decision before 5 March 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons I’ve explained, my final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint. I don’t direct Ageas Insurance Limited to do any more in response to this complaint.
View source decision