Published decisions
1,110
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Firm + product analysis
A curated public analysis of esure Insurance Limited's published Financial Ombudsman decisions in Insurance, including outcome context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,110
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Upheld rate
51.4%
571 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,110 published FOS decisions involving esure Insurance Limited in Insurance, with upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,110
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Upheld rate
51.4%
571 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
1,110
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Upheld rate
51.4%
571 upheld decisions
Latest active year
2026
23 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
54 tagged decisions
esure Insurance Limited appears in 1,110 published decisions in Insurance across this corpus. 51.4% of those decisions were upheld, making this one of the strongest public firm-product slices available for search and research.
The latest year represented in this slice is 2026, with 23 published decisions and an upheld rate of 34.8%.
esure Insurance Limited has a multi-year published decision trail in Insurance, which makes it possible to judge whether complaint exposure has been persistent or concentrated into a smaller set of years.
Insurance remains a meaningful part of esure Insurance Limited's published complaint exposure, but this page isolates just that one product line instead of blending it with the firm's wider footprint.
Delay In Claim Handling is the clearest complaint-theme signal in this firm-product slice, which helps explain what tends to drive published ombudsman decisions here.
The product advisory layer also points to recurring handling implications, including review consumer credit act 1974 precedent (appears in 1.3% of cases), review section 140a cca precedent (appears in 1.1% of cases), review disp precedent (appears in 0.3% of cases), and others.
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