Published decisions
13,036
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Nationwide Building Society, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
13,036
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
22.7%
2,965 upheld decisions
Page summary
13,036 published decisions involving Nationwide Building Society, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
13,036
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
22.7%
2,965 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
13,036
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
22.7%
2,965 upheld decisions
Leading product
Payment protection insurance (PPI)
5,679 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
1,042 tagged decisions
Nationwide Building Society appears in 13,036 published decisions in this corpus. 22.7% 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.
Payment protection insurance (PPI) is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 5,679 decisions and an upheld rate of 23.1%.
Nationwide Building Society'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, Nationwide Building Society appeared in 91 published decisions with an upheld rate of 20.9%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Nationwide Building Society in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 75 Cca, Disp, 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 this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr D to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionI do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss P to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons I’ve explained I’ve decided not to uphold Mr W’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr W to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss C to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons outlined above, my final decision is that I’m not upholding Mrs T’s complaint against Nationwide Building Society. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs T to accept or reject my decision before 18 May 2026.
View source decision