Published decisions
297
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Kensington Mortgage Company Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
297
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
29.6%
88 upheld decisions
Page summary
297 published decisions involving Kensington Mortgage Company Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
297
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
29.6%
88 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 17 Mar 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
297
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
29.6%
88 upheld decisions
Leading product
Banking and credit
183 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
47 tagged decisions
Kensington Mortgage Company Limited appears in 297 published decisions in this corpus. 29.6% 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 183 decisions and an upheld rate of 26.2%.
Kensington Mortgage Company 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, Kensington Mortgage Company Limited appeared in 1 published decisions with an upheld rate of 0.0%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Kensington Mortgage Company Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Consumer Credit Act 1974, Disp, Mcob 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 final decision is that Kensington Mortgage Company Limited has made a fair and reasonable offer to resolve this complaint. It should pay Mr O £500 compensation.
View source decisionDRN-5875135 The complaint Mr and Mrs A complain that Kensington Mortgage Company Limited sent them a letter about their mortgage in an unsealed envelope. What happened Mr and Mrs A used to have a mortgage with Kensington. They recently received a letter from Kensington about the commiss... (2 pages)
View source decisionDRN-5686474 The complaint Mr N complains about the way Kensington Mortgage Company Limited trading as Acenden handled his mortgage account and that it failed to provide copies of key documents. Mr N asks that Acenden’s handling of the mortgage is investigated and it’s ordered to disclos... (3 pages)
View source decisionDRN-5631370 The complaint Mr and Mrs W complain that Kensington Mortgage Company Limited wouldn’t allow them to take a different interest rate product on their mortgage when a lower rate became available before completion. What happened Mr and Mrs W were buying a new property. Through a... (2 pages)
View source decisionDRN-5691758 The complaint Mrs B and Mr S complain that for a period in 2024 they missed making their mortgage payments on their residential property as they fell due and Kensington Mortgage Company Limited failed to notify them about the missed payments. What happened Mrs B and Mr S hav... (2 pages)
View source decision