Published decisions
1,098
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Great Lakes Insurance SE, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,098
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
45.8%
503 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,098 published decisions involving Great Lakes Insurance SE, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,098
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
45.8%
503 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 14 Sept 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
1,098
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
45.8%
503 upheld decisions
Leading product
Insurance
889 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
87 tagged decisions
Great Lakes Insurance SE appears in 1,098 published decisions in this corpus. 45.8% 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 889 decisions and an upheld rate of 45.3%.
Great Lakes Insurance SE's decision trail runs from 2017 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, Great Lakes Insurance SE appeared in 10 published decisions with an upheld rate of 60.0%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Great Lakes Insurance SE in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Disp, Icobs, Insurance Act 2015 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
My decision is that I don’t uphold the complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr M to accept or reject my decision before 12 October 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons I’ve explained, I partly uphold this complaint and require Great Lakes Insurance SE to put things right as set out above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr N and Mrs N to accept or reject my decision before 2 October 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons explained I’m upholding the complaint and direct Great Lakes Insurance SE to pay Mrs D £250 to resolve the complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs D to accept or reject my decision before 1 October 2026.
View source decisionI’ve decided to uphold this complaint. Great Lakes Insurance SE will need to pay Mr C £400 and engage with him promptly over the next steps in relation to his claim (if it hasn’t already done so).
View source decisionFor the reasons I've set up above, my final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint or require Great Lakes Insurance SE to do anything more in relation to it. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs J to accept or reject my decision before 18 September 2026.
View source decision