Published decisions
3,736
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm 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 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%.
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%.
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.
Representative cases
5 examples shown
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 decisionMy 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 decisionMy 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 decisionMy 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 decisionI uphold this complaint. Clydesdale Bank Plc trading as Virgin Money should put things right as set out above.
View source decision