Published decisions
4,918
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Aviva Insurance Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
4,918
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
30.2%
1,485 upheld decisions
Page summary
4,918 published decisions involving Aviva Insurance Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
4,918
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
30.2%
1,485 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 24 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
4,918
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
30.2%
1,485 upheld decisions
Leading product
Insurance
2,701 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
587 tagged decisions
Aviva Insurance Limited appears in 4,918 published decisions in this corpus. 30.2% 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 2,701 decisions and an upheld rate of 33.3%.
Aviva 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, Aviva Insurance Limited appeared in 37 published decisions with an upheld rate of 35.1%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Aviva 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
My final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Ms C and Ms D and the estate of Mrs D to accept or reject my decision before 21 April 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons I have given, it is my final decision that this complaint is not upheld. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr E to accept or reject my decision before 21 April 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I uphold this complaint. Aviva Insurance Limited should: • update the CUE record to show as bonus allowed, and • pay Mrs D £300 compensation.
View source decisionFor the reasons I’ve explained above, I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr D and Mrs D to accept or reject my decision before 20 April 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons I set out above, it’s my final decision that I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask L to accept or reject my decision before 20 April 2026.
View source decision