Published decisions
748
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Madison CF UK Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
748
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
36.8%
275 upheld decisions
Page summary
748 published decisions involving Madison CF UK Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
748
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
36.8%
275 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 24 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
748
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
36.8%
275 upheld decisions
Leading product
Consumer Credit
517 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Affordability Assessment Failure
284 tagged decisions
Madison CF UK Limited appears in 748 published decisions in this corpus. 36.8% 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.
Consumer Credit is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 517 decisions and an upheld rate of 38.1%.
Madison CF UK Limited's decision trail runs from 2015 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, Madison CF UK Limited appeared in 23 published decisions with an upheld rate of 13.0%.
Affordability Assessment Failure is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Madison CF UK 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, Conc, 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
My final decision is that I don’t uphold Miss F’s complaint against Madison CF UK Limited trading as 118 118 Money. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss F to accept or reject my decision before 21 September 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I’m not upholding Miss P’s complaint about Madison CF UK Limited trading as 118 118 Money. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss P to accept or reject my decision before 17 September 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons I’ve explained, I’m not upholding Ms L’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Ms L to accept or reject my decision before 1 September 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I’m not upholding Mr B’s complaint about Madison CF UK Ltd. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr B to accept or reject my decision before 1 September 2026.
View source decisionIt’s my final decision that I do not uphold this complaint against Madison CF UK Limited trading as 118 118 Money for the reasons set out above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr G to accept or reject my decision before 18 August 2026.
View source decision