Published decisions
869
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Year + product analysis
A curated public analysis of Insurance in 2026, combining annual and product-level signals from the published Financial Ombudsman decision corpus.
Published decisions
869
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
30.0%
261 upheld decisions
Page summary
869 published FOS decisions in Insurance during 2026, with upheld-rate context, firm concentration, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
869
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
30.0%
261 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
869
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
30.0%
261 upheld decisions
Leading firm
Aviva Insurance Limited
59 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
267 tagged decisions
869 published decisions in the corpus sit in Insurance for 2026. 30.0% of those decisions were upheld, which makes this a strong public cross-section for understanding how one product behaved in one specific year.
Aviva Insurance Limited is the most visible firm inside this year-product slice, with 59 published decisions.
Aviva Insurance Limited, Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited, U K Insurance Limited, and others are the firms most often associated with Insurance complaints in 2026. This gives a much tighter public view than the standalone year or product pages alone.
delay in claim handling, policy wording ambiguity, non-disclosure or misrepresentation, and others are the strongest complaint-theme signals in this year-product combination.
The advisory layer for Insurance points to recurring handling implications here, 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.
There is no strong “what loses” signal exposed for this product at the current advisory granularity.
Representative cases
5 examples shown
For the reasons set out above, my final decision is that I uphold this complaint and require Domestic & General Insurance Plc to carry out the directions set out in the “Putting things right” section above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss G to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons given above, I don’t uphold Mr S’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss F and Mr S to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons outlined above, 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 S and Mr S to accept or reject my decision before 19 May 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons given above, my final decision is that I uphold this complaint. I require Acromas Insurance Company Limited to carry out the redress set out above.
View source decisionFor the reasons I have given 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 decision