Published decisions
377
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Experian Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
377
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
22.3%
84 upheld decisions
Page summary
377 published decisions involving Experian Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
377
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
22.3%
84 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 21 Aug 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
377
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
22.3%
84 upheld decisions
Leading product
Banking and credit
203 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
41 tagged decisions
Experian Limited appears in 377 published decisions in this corpus. 22.3% 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.
Banking and credit is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 203 decisions and an upheld rate of 19.7%.
Experian 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, Experian Limited appeared in 6 published decisions with an upheld rate of 50.0%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Experian Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Consumer Credit Act 1974, Conc, Disp 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 above, my final decision is that Miss B’s complaint is not upheld. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss B to accept or reject my decision before 18 September 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons above, my final decision is that Ms B’s complaint is not upheld. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Ms B to accept or reject my decision before 14 September 2026.
View source decisionI uphold this complaint and require Experian Limited to pay £150 compensation to Mr S. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr S to accept or reject my decision before 25 August 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons explained above, I do not 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 20 August 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is I uphold this complaint against Experian Limited. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr Y to accept or reject my decision before 11 August 2026.
View source decision