Published decisions
1,862
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
1,862
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
46.3%
862 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,862 published decisions involving esure Insurance Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,862
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
46.3%
862 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
1,862
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
46.3%
862 upheld decisions
Leading product
Insurance
1,110 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
178 tagged decisions
esure Insurance Limited appears in 1,862 published decisions in this corpus. 46.3% 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 1,110 decisions and an upheld rate of 51.4%.
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 23 published decisions with an upheld rate of 34.8%.
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
For the reasons given above, I don’t uphold Mrs N’s complaint, and I don’t require esure Insurance Limited to do any more in response to her complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs N to accept or reject my decision before 25 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons provided, 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 S to accept or reject my decision before 18 August 2026.
View source decisionIt’s my final decision that I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs V to accept or reject my decision before 18 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons above, I have decided not to uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr and Mrs L to accept or reject my decision before 11 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 Miss W to accept or reject my decision before 31 July 2026.
View source decision