Published decisions
523
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
523
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
31.9%
167 upheld decisions
Page summary
523 published FOS decisions in Insurance during 2026, with upheld-rate context, firm concentration, complaint themes, and representative cases.
Published decisions
523
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
31.9%
167 upheld decisions
Latest published decision 17 Mar 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
523
Decision volume in this year-product slice
Upheld rate
31.9%
167 upheld decisions
Leading firm
Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited
40 decisions
Leading complaint theme
Delay In Claim Handling
165 tagged decisions
523 published decisions in the corpus sit in Insurance for 2026. 31.9% of those decisions were upheld, which makes this a strong public cross-section for understanding how one product behaved in one specific year.
Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited is the most visible firm inside this year-product slice, with 40 published decisions.
Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited, Aviva Insurance 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
I don’t uphold Mrs P’s complaint about Zurich Assurance Ltd. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs P to accept or reject my decision before 14 April 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons I’ve given, it’s my final decision that I don’t uphold this complaint. And I make no award against Vitality Health Limited.
View source decisionFor the reasons I have given, it is my final decision that the complaint is not upheld. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr J to accept or reject my decision before 14 April 2026.
View source decisionFor the reasons set out above, I don’t uphold Miss C’s complaint against Red Sands Insurance Company (Europe) Limited. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss C to accept or reject my decision before 14 April 2026.
View source decisionI do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask R to accept or reject my decision before 21 April 2026.
View source decision