Published decisions
907
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving BUPA Insurance Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
907
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
23.8%
216 upheld decisions
Page summary
907 published decisions involving BUPA Insurance Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
907
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
23.8%
216 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
907
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
23.8%
216 upheld decisions
Leading product
Insurance (excluding PPI)
473 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
97 tagged decisions
BUPA Insurance Limited appears in 907 published decisions in this corpus. 23.8% 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 (excluding PPI) is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 473 decisions and an upheld rate of 26.4%.
BUPA 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, BUPA Insurance Limited appeared in 8 published decisions with an upheld rate of 12.5%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to BUPA Insurance Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Icobs, 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 I’ve 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 Miss C to accept or reject my decision before 25 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons given above, I partially uphold Mrs M and Mr N’s complaint about BUPA Insurance Limited. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs M and Mr N to accept or reject my decision before 24 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons set out above I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Ms T to accept or reject my decision before 21 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons I’ve outlined above, I don’t uphold Mr G’s complaint about BUPA Insurance Limited. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr G to accept or reject my decision before 3 August 2026.
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 Ms S to accept or reject my decision before 27 July 2026.
View source decision