Published decisions
1,620
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Year + product analysis
A curated public analysis of Banking and Payments in 2026, combining annual and product-level signals from the published Financial Ombudsman decision corpus.
Published decisions
1,620
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
19.8%
321 upheld decisions
Page summary
1,620 published FOS decisions in Banking and Payments during 2026, with upheld-rate context, firm concentration, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
1,620
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
19.8%
321 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
1,620
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
19.8%
321 upheld decisions
Leading firm
Barclays Bank UK PLC
171 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Fraud Or Scam Concern
842 tagged decisions
1,620 published decisions in the corpus sit in Banking and Payments for 2026. 19.8% of those decisions were upheld, which makes this a strong public cross-section for understanding how one product behaved in one specific year.
Barclays Bank UK PLC is the most visible firm inside this year-product slice, with 171 published decisions.
Barclays Bank UK PLC, HSBC UK Bank Plc, Revolut Ltd, and others are the firms most often associated with Banking and Payments complaints in 2026. This gives a much tighter public view than the standalone year or product pages alone.
fraud or scam concern, delay in claim handling, affordability assessment failure, and others are the strongest complaint-theme signals in this year-product combination.
The advisory layer for Banking and Payments points to recurring handling implications here, including review consumer credit act 1974 precedent (appears in 2.7% of cases), review section 75 cca precedent (appears in 1.9% of cases), review section 140a cca precedent (appears in 0.4% of cases), and others.
There is no strong “what loses” signal exposed for this product at the current advisory granularity.
Representative cases
5 examples shown
My final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr M to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionMy final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint about Metro Bank PLC. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask D to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons given above, it’s my final decision not to uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss A to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
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 Miss S to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionI am upholding Miss P’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss P to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decision