Published decisions
2,850
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Firm + product analysis
A curated public analysis of U K Insurance Limited's published Financial Ombudsman decisions in Insurance, including outcome context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
2,850
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Upheld rate
33.3%
950 upheld decisions
Page summary
2,850 published FOS decisions involving U K Insurance Limited in Insurance, with upheld-rate context, complaint themes, precedent signals, and representative cases.
Published decisions
2,850
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Upheld rate
33.3%
950 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 20 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
2,850
Decision volume in this firm-product slice
Upheld rate
33.3%
950 upheld decisions
Latest active year
2026
48 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
103 tagged decisions
U K Insurance Limited appears in 2,850 published decisions in Insurance across this corpus. 33.3% 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 48 published decisions and an upheld rate of 31.3%.
U K Insurance Limited has a multi-year published decision trail in Insurance, which makes it possible to judge whether complaint exposure has been persistent or concentrated into a smaller set of years.
Insurance remains a meaningful part of U K Insurance Limited's published complaint exposure, but this page isolates just that one product line instead of blending it with the firm's wider footprint.
Delay In Claim Handling 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 1.3% of cases), review section 140a cca precedent (appears in 1.1% of cases), review disp precedent (appears in 0.3% of cases), and others.
Representative cases
5 examples shown
For the reasons I stated above, I am not upholding this complaint. U K Insurance Limited should pay Miss P the £50 compensation if it has not done so already.
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 Mrs J and X to accept or reject my decision before 15 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons explained above, I’m not making any award against U K Insurance Limited. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr G to accept or reject my decision before 15 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons set out above I do not require UKI to take any further action concerning the complaint points above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr W to accept or reject my decision before 15 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons provided, I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Ms M to accept or reject my decision before 30 April 2026.
View source decision