Published decisions
1,059
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Firm analysis
A public analysis page covering published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving Shop Direct Finance Company Limited, including outcome context, product mix, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,059
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
30.5%
323 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,059 published decisions involving Shop Direct Finance Company Limited, with product mix, upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,059
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
30.5%
323 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
1,059
Firm-specific decision volume in the public corpus
Upheld rate
30.5%
323 upheld decisions
Leading product
Banking and credit
555 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
188 tagged decisions
Shop Direct Finance Company Limited appears in 1,059 published decisions in this corpus. 30.5% 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.
Banking and credit is the firm’s clearest product exposure in the published decisions, with 555 decisions and an upheld rate of 29.7%.
Shop Direct Finance Company 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, Shop Direct Finance Company Limited appeared in 9 published decisions with an upheld rate of 44.4%.
Delay In Claim Handling is the strongest complaint-theme signal tied to Shop Direct Finance Company Limited 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, Section 140a Cca, 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 set out above, my final decision is I do not uphold Miss T’s complaint about Shop Direct Finance Company Limited trading as Very. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss T to accept or reject my decision before 21 September 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I uphold part of Miss S’ complaint and direct Shop Direct Finance Company Limited to put things right as detailed above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss S to accept or reject my decision before 8 September 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I uphold this complaint. Subject to Mr K’s acceptance, Shop Direct Finance Company Limited trading as Very should now pay him further compensation of £20.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I uphold Miss B’s complaint and direct Shop Direct Finance Company Limited to take the above action. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss B to accept or reject my decision before 31 July 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I do not uphold Ms G’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Ms G to accept or reject my decision before 27 July 2026.
View source decision