Complaints data: 2026 H1

The aggregate picture is one of gently rising volume combined with marginally improving first-instance outcomes — but the real intelligence sits beneath the headline, in the firm-level and product-level breakdowns the FCA publishes alongside it. For compliance and conduct teams, this is now a primary external benchmark: the regulator explicitly frames the data as a tool for comparing firm performance against the wider market and for identifying areas of concern. Boards and Consumer Duty champions should expect questions on how their complaint volumes, uphold rates and redress levels track against sector medians, particularly where deviations suggest root-cause or outcome failures.

Three practical priorities follow. First, reconcile your own reported figures against the published dataset to confirm accuracy and spot category drift. Second, revisit root-cause analysis where uphold rates sit above the 54.8% market average — a signal of weak upfront handling rather than noisy complaints.

Third, stress-test redress provisioning against the 1.8% upward trend. The data carries no new rules, but it is supervisory signal: firms that cannot explain their position relative to peers should assume they will be asked to. Treat this as a benchmarking and assurance trigger, not a compliance burden.