Published decisions
700
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Northern Bank Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
700
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
36.1%
253 upheld decisions
Page summary
700 published decisions involving Northern Bank Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
700
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
36.1%
253 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 17 Feb 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
700
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
36.1%
253 upheld decisions
Leading product
Payment protection insurance (PPI)
472 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Affordability Assessment Failure
52 tagged decisions
Northern Bank Limited appears in 700 published decisions in this corpus. 36.1% 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 472 decisions and an upheld rate of 39.8%.
Northern Bank 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, Northern Bank Limited appeared in 1 published decisions with an upheld rate of 0.0%.
Affordability Assessment Failure is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Northern Bank Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Consumer Credit Act 1974, Disp, Icobs, 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
Because of the reasons given above, I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr B and Mrs B to accept or reject my decision before 17 March 2026.
View source decisionDRN-5873763 The complaint Mr S complains that Northern Bank Limited trading as Danske Bank failed to apply a block to his current account which would have prevented certain gambling transactions. What happened Mr S has a current account with Danske Bank. On 27 November 2024, he called a... (2 pages)
View source decisionDRN-5924251 The complaint Mr S complains that Northern Bank Limited trading as Danske Bank, won’t refund money he says he lost to an investment scam. Mr S is professionally represented, however, to keep things simple, I’ll refer to Mr S throughout my decision. What happened As the parti... (3 pages)
View source decisionDRN-5899923 The complaint Mr L complains that Northern Bank trading as Danske Bank didn’t do enough to protect him from the financial harm caused by an investment scam, or to help him recover the money once he’d reported the scam to it. What happened Mr L was introduced by a friend to ... (4 pages)
View source decisionDRN-5755000 The complaint Mr H complains that Northern Bank Limited trading as Danske Bank didn’t do enough to protect him when he fell victim to an investment scam. What happened Mr H says that he was cold called by a company I’ll refer to as C. During this contact he said they presen... (3 pages)
View source decision