Published decisions
1,034
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving ReAssure Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,034
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
35.6%
368 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,034 published decisions involving ReAssure Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,034
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
35.6%
368 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 23 Jul 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
1,034
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
35.6%
368 upheld decisions
Leading product
Pensions and Annuities
384 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
172 tagged decisions
ReAssure Limited appears in 1,034 published decisions in this corpus. 35.6% 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.
Pensions and Annuities is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 384 decisions and an upheld rate of 48.7%.
ReAssure 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, ReAssure Limited appeared in 7 published decisions with an upheld rate of 28.6%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to ReAssure Limited in the published decisions. In this corpus, those themes are the most stable public proxy for complaint “type”.
Cobs, Fsma, 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
For the reasons I’ve given above, I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs P to accept or reject my decision before 20 August 2026.
View source decisionI uphold the complaint. My decision is that ReAssure Limited should pay the amount calculated as set out above.
View source decisionMy final decision is that the compensation award of £500 is fair in the circumstances here. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs S to accept or reject my decision before 27 July 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is I uphold Mr S’ estate’s complaint about ReAssure Limited insofar as I find it has at times provided poor service to the estate. However I make no award for compensation, as I’m not persuaded the estate’s experienced any measurable impact as a result of that poor service.
View source decisionFor the reasons set out above, I’m not upholding this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr K to accept or reject my decision before 14 May 2026.
View source decision