Published decisions
1,290
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,290
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
29.2%
377 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,290 published decisions involving Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,290
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
29.2%
377 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 21 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
1,290
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
29.2%
377 upheld decisions
Leading product
Insurance
766 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
119 tagged decisions
Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited appears in 1,290 published decisions in this corpus. 29.2% 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 766 decisions and an upheld rate of 28.1%.
Lloyds Bank General Insurance 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, Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited appeared in 14 published decisions with an upheld rate of 14.3%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Insurance Act 2015, Disp, Icobs 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 explained, I’m not upholding Mr and Mrs W’s complaint about Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited, trading as Halifax. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr W and Mrs W to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons above, I uphold this complaint and direct Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited to: • Attend the property to clean and deodorise it and undertake the remaining repairs. To facilitate this, Lloyds must arrange alternative accommodation for Miss R and her son at their expense.
View source decisionFor the reasons set out above, I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss M and Mr M to accept or reject my decision before 28 April 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons outlined above, I don’t uphold Mr L and Mrs L’s complaint about Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr L and Mrs L to accept or reject my decision before 28 April 2026.
View source decisionMy decision is I’m upholding Mrs S’s complaint about Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited and direct them to put things right as above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs S to accept or reject my decision before 20 April 2026.
View source decision