Published decisions
573
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving FirstRand Bank Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
573
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
44.0%
252 upheld decisions
Page summary
573 published decisions involving FirstRand Bank Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
573
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
44.0%
252 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 02 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
573
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
44.0%
252 upheld decisions
Leading product
Banking and credit
408 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
57 tagged decisions
FirstRand Bank Limited appears in 573 published decisions in this corpus. 44.0% 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 408 decisions and an upheld rate of 43.9%.
FirstRand Bank 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, FirstRand Bank Limited appeared in 2 published decisions with an upheld rate of 0.0%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to FirstRand Bank Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 140a Cca, Section 75 Cca, 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 outlined above, I am not upholding Mr J’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr J to accept or reject my decision before 30 April 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I don’t uphold Miss T’s complaint about FirstRand Bank Limited trading as MotoNovo Finance for the reasons I’ve set out. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss T to accept or reject my decision before 28 April 2026.
View source decisionDRN-6035034 The complaint Mr A complains that FirstRand Bank Limited trading as Motonovo Finance irresponsibly provided him with an unaffordable regulated hire purchase agreement. Mr A’s complaint has been brought by a professional representative, however for ease I’ve referred to all ... (4 pages)
View source decisionDRN-5808049 The complaint Mr M complains that a hire purchase agreement with FirstRand Bank Limited, trading as Motonovo Finance, under which a car was supplied to him, was unaffordable for him. Mr M is being represented by a claims management company. What happened A used car was suppl... (3 pages)
View source decisionDRN-5948213 Complaint Miss C complains that FirstRand Bank Limited (trading as “MotoNovo” Finance) unfairly entered into a hire-purchase agreement with her. She’s said the payments to her agreement were unaffordable. Background In June 2016, MotoNovo provided Miss C with finance for a ... (3 pages)
View source decision