Published decisions
865
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
Cheltenham & Gloucester plc complaint analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Cheltenham & Gloucester plc, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Page summary
865 published decisions involving Cheltenham & Gloucester plc, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
865
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
7.9%
68 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 05 Sept 2019
Upheld rate
7.9%
68 upheld decisions
Leading product
Payment protection insurance (PPI)
616 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Affordability Assessment Failure
199 tagged decisions
Cheltenham & Gloucester plc at a glance
Cheltenham & Gloucester plc appears in 865 published decisions in this corpus. 7.9% 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.
Payment protection insurance (PPI) is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 616 decisions and an upheld rate of 6.2%.
- Latest active year in the published data: 2019 (4 decisions)
- Most common complaint theme: Affordability Assessment Failure
- Most common precedent signal: Disp
Volume and outcome trajectory
Cheltenham & Gloucester plc's decision trail runs from 2013 to 2019. 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, Cheltenham & Gloucester plc appeared in 4 published decisions with an upheld rate of 0.0%.
- 2019: 4 decisions, 0.0% upheld
- 2018: 48 decisions, 16.7% upheld
- 2017: 170 decisions, 5.3% upheld
- 2016: 228 decisions, 5.7% upheld
- 2015: 117 decisions, 15.4% upheld
Themes, products, and precedent signals
Affordability Assessment Failure is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Cheltenham & Gloucester plc in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Disp, Mcob, Fsma, 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.
- Payment protection insurance (PPI): 616 decisions
- Second complaint theme: Delay In Claim Handling
- Second precedent signal: Mcob
Representative cases
Recent published decisions in this slice
5 examples shown
DRN813401305 Sept 2019Not upheld
Cheltenham & Gloucester plc · Payment protection insurance (PPI)
ComplaintMrs W, who is represented by a third party, has complained to us that Cheltenham & Gloucester Plc (C&G) mis-sold her payment protection insurance (‘PPI’) alongside a mortgage in January 1987. BackgroundMrs W said she did not know she had a PPI policy and it wasn’t properly... (2 pages)
View source decisionDRN901716021 Aug 2019Not upheld
Cheltenham & Gloucester plc · Banking and credit
ComplaintMr and Mrs B’s complaint is about problems they’ve had with how Cheltenham & Gloucester Plc (C&G - who are part of the Lloyds Banking Group) has administered a buy to let (BTL) mortgage on a property they own. There are several elements to the complaint but the crux of the... (8 pages)
View source decisionDRN739087515 Feb 2019Not upheld
Cheltenham & Gloucester plc · Banking and credit
Mr R and Mr G complain about charges applied to their mortgage account by Cheltenham & Gloucester Plc. Mr R has brought the complaint to us. He says Cheltenham & Gloucester should refund charges applied to the account and the refund should be paid to him not t... (3 pages)
View source decisionDRN435996823 Jan 2019Not upheld
Cheltenham & Gloucester plc · Payment protection insurance (PPI)
Ms M says Lloyds Bank Plc, trading Cheltenham & Gloucester at the time mis-sold her a mortgage payment protection insurance (PPI) policy.backgroundThe background to this complaint, and my provisional findings, can be found in my provisional decision which I’ve attach... (4 pages)
View source decisionDRN104258504 Oct 2018Not upheld
Cheltenham & Gloucester plc · Banking and credit
Mr and Mrs S complain that Cheltenham & Gloucester plc (“C & G”) mis-sold them further advances under their mortgage to them when this wasn’t suitable to meet their needs. They want matters put right. backgroundMr and Mrs S had an interest only mortgage with ... (2 pages)
View source decision