Firm analysis

Clydesdale Bank Plc complaint analysis

A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Clydesdale Bank Plc, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.

Page summary

3,736 published decisions involving Clydesdale Bank Plc, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.

Published decisions

3,736

Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus

Upheld rate

27.1%

1,011 upheld decisions

Latest published decision 02 Feb 2026

Published decisions

3,736

Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus

Upheld rate

27.1%

1,011 upheld decisions

Leading product

Banking and Payments

1,313 decisions

Leading complaint theme

Delay In Claim Handling

323 tagged decisions

Clydesdale Bank Plc at a glance

Clydesdale Bank Plc appears in 3,736 published decisions in this corpus. 27.1% 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.

Banking and Payments is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 1,313 decisions and an upheld rate of 30.1%.

  • Latest active year in the published data: 2026 (5 decisions)
  • Most common complaint theme: Delay In Claim Handling
  • Most common precedent signal: Consumer Credit Act 1974

Volume and outcome trajectory

Clydesdale Bank Plc'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, Clydesdale Bank Plc appeared in 5 published decisions with an upheld rate of 40.0%.

  • 2026: 5 decisions, 40.0% upheld
  • 2025: 389 decisions, 26.2% upheld
  • 2024: 330 decisions, 36.1% upheld
  • 2023: 328 decisions, 35.7% upheld
  • 2022: 238 decisions, 29.4% upheld

Themes, products, and precedent signals

Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Clydesdale Bank Plc in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.

Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 75 Cca, Disp, 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.

  • Banking and Payments: 1,313 decisions
  • Second complaint theme: Affordability Assessment Failure
  • Second precedent signal: Section 75 Cca

Representative cases

Recent published decisions in this slice

5 examples shown

DRN-609794502 Feb 2026Not upheld

Clydesdale Bank Plc · Banking and Payments

For the reasons I’ve explained, I’m not upholding Mr I’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr I to accept or reject my decision before 2 March 2026.

View source decision
DRN-566634730 Jan 2026Not upheld

Clydesdale Bank Plc · Banking and Payments

My final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss A to accept or reject my decision before 27 February 2026.

View source decision
DRN-581994830 Jan 2026Upheld

Clydesdale Bank Plc · Banking and Payments

My final decision is that I’m upholding this complaint and require Clydesdale Bank Plc trading as Virgin Money to pay Mr W £250 in compensation. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr W to accept or reject my decision before 27 February 2026.

View source decision
DRN-592243430 Jan 2026Not upheld

Clydesdale Bank Plc · Banking and Payments

My decision is that I do not uphold the complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr W to accept or reject my decision before 27 February 2026.

View source decision
DRN-602264830 Jan 2026Upheld

Clydesdale Bank Plc · Banking and Payments

I uphold this complaint. Clydesdale Bank Plc trading as Virgin Money should put things right as set out above.

View source decision