Firms ›
Advanced Payment Solutions Limited
Companies House FC043443, incorporated May 2026
168banking decisions
66.7%uphold rate
56not upheld
What this firm loses on
| Issue | Decisions | Upheld | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unauthorised transaction | 52 | 44 | 84.6% |
| Service failure | 27 | 23 | 85.2% |
| APP scam refund refused | 23 | 14 | 60.9% |
| Credit file reporting | 21 | 13 | 61.9% |
| Funds blocked or frozen | 20 | 9 | 45.0% |
| Account closed or refused | 19 | 9 | 47.4% |
| Complaint handling | 19 | 12 | 63.2% |
| Charges and fees | 19 | 13 | 68.4% |
| Payment delayed or failed | 12 | 9 | 75.0% |
| Identity checks and access | 11 | 5 | 45.5% |
| Irresponsible lending | 10 | 7 | 70.0% |
The official record
What the firm itself reports to the regulator, scoped to banking and credit complaints only. This is a different measure from the decisions above — it covers all complaints a firm received, not only those that reached an ombudsman. Firms report on periods set by the regulator, which are not always the calendar half-year the file was published under (shown below where they differ). No period-over-period change is calculated here — these are the reported figures only. See the scorecard for all three measures side by side.
| Source | Period | Upheld | Opened | Closed | New cases |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FCA | 2023-H2 2023-04-01 to 2023-09-30 | 20.3% | 1,378 | 1,302 | — |
| FCA | 2023-H1 2022-10-01 to 2023-03-31 | 16.3% | 925 | 1,183 | — |
| FCA | 2022-H2 2022-04-01 to 2022-09-30 | 19.5% | 938 | 1,262 | — |
| FCA | 2022-H1 2021-10-01 to 2022-03-31 | 16.8% | 989 | 1,349 | — |
| FCA | 2021-H2 2021-04-01 to 2021-09-30 | 16.2% | 1,496 | 1,540 | — |
| FCA | 2021-H1 01-10-2020 to 31-03-2021 | 19.6% | 1,283 | 1,187 | — |
| FOS | 2024-H1 | 44.8% | — | — | 144 |
| FOS | 2023-H2 | 56.8% | — | — | 150 |
| FOS | 2023-H1 | 38.1% | — | — | 126 |
| FOS | 2022-H2 | 29.1% | — | — | 121 |
| FOS | 2022-H1 | 35.5% | — | — | 87 |
| FOS | 2021-H2 | 47.2% | — | — | 106 |
| FOS | 2021-H1 | 39.2% | — | — | 141 |
Decisions are attributed to a firm only where the decision text names it unambiguously. Where a name could refer to more than one firm, the decision is left unattributed rather than guessed, so these counts are a floor, not a total. Method.