Published decisions
1,856
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving esure Insurance Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,856
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
46.4%
861 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,856 published decisions involving esure Insurance Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,856
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
46.4%
861 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 16 Apr 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
1,856
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
46.4%
861 upheld decisions
Leading product
Insurance
1,104 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
176 tagged decisions
esure Insurance Limited appears in 1,856 published decisions in this corpus. 46.4% 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 1,104 decisions and an upheld rate of 51.6%.
esure 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, esure Insurance Limited appeared in 17 published decisions with an upheld rate of 41.2%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to esure Insurance Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Disp, Icobs 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
I’m sorry to disappoint Mr M. But for the reasons I’ve given above, my final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint.
View source decisionFor the reasons I stated above, I am upholding this complaint. esure Insurance Limited is required to: • Pay Mr R the cost of the additional hire car days he paid for himself.
View source decisionFor the reasons set out 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 Mr N to accept or reject my decision before 20 April 2026.
View source decisionI partially uphold this complaint and direct esure Insurance Limited to pay Mr L £250. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr L to accept or reject my decision before 14 April 2026.
View source decisionI uphold Mr I’s complaint and direct esure Insurance Limited to do as I’ve set out above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr I to accept or reject my decision before 3 April 2026.
View source decision