Published decisions
1,496
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Firm + product analysis
A curated public analysis of Shawbrook Bank Limited's published Financial Ombudsman decisions in Consumer Credit, including outcome context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,496
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Upheld rate
21.3%
318 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,496 published FOS decisions involving Shawbrook Bank Limited in Consumer Credit, with upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,496
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Upheld rate
21.3%
318 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
1,496
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Upheld rate
21.3%
318 upheld decisions
Latest active year
2026
181 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Non-disclosure Or Misrepresentation
602 tagged decisions
Shawbrook Bank Limited appears in 1,496 published decisions in Consumer Credit across this corpus. 21.3% of those decisions were upheld, making this one of the strongest public firm-product slices available for search and research.
The latest year represented in this slice is 2026, with 181 published decisions and an upheld rate of 5.0%.
Shawbrook Bank Limited has a multi-year published decision trail in Consumer Credit, which makes it possible to judge whether complaint exposure has been persistent or concentrated into a smaller set of years.
Consumer Credit remains a meaningful part of Shawbrook Bank Limited's published complaint exposure, but this page isolates just that one product line instead of blending it with the firm's wider footprint.
Non-disclosure Or Misrepresentation is the clearest complaint-theme signal in this firm-product slice, which helps explain what tends to drive published ombudsman decisions here.
The product advisory layer also points to recurring handling implications, including review consumer credit act 1974 precedent (appears in 12.9% of cases), review section 75 cca precedent (appears in 8.6% of cases), review section 140a cca precedent (appears in 5.1% of cases), and others.
Representative cases
5 examples shown
I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs C and Mr S to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons given, I don’t think it was unfair for Shawbrook Bank Limited to decline Mr and Mrs I’s claims under section 75 of the CCA. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs A and Mr I to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons summarised above, and explained in the appended provisional decision, I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr D and Mrs D to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons set out above, I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr and Mrs B to accept or reject my decision before 18 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons explained above, I do not uphold Mr and Mrs B’s 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 18 May 2026.
View source decision