Firms ›
RCI Financial Services Limited
Legal entity: RCI Financial Services Limited
FCA register status: Authorised — the FCA’s own status for this firm reference, not our finding. See the FCA’s own record on the Financial Services Register.
Companies House 03302462, incorporated January 1997
153banking decisions
38.6%uphold rate
94not upheld
Beyond banking
The figures above cover this firm’s banking, credit and mortgage decisions only. The Ombudsman also decided complaints about it in other sectors, which behave differently and are kept separate rather than averaged in.
| Sector | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Banking, credit and mortgages — shown above | 153 | 38.6% |
| Insurance (excluding PPI) | 1 | — |
| Payment protection insurance | 1 | — |
What this firm loses on
| Issue | Decisions | Upheld | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment in financial difficulty | 20 | 3 | 15.0% |
| Product mis-sold | 18 | 8 | 44.4% |
| Credit file reporting | 17 | 12 | 70.6% |
| Charges and fees | 14 | 3 | 21.4% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FOS | 2025-H2 | 43.4% | — | — | 382 |
| FOS | 2025-H1 | 39.5% | — | — | 1,078 |
| FOS | 2024-H2 | 40.0% | — | — | 283 |
| FOS | 2024-H1 | 27.6% | — | — | 605 |
| FOS | 2023-H2 | 17.8% | — | — | 179 |
| FOS | 2023-H1 | 28.7% | — | — | 182 |
| FOS | 2022-H2 | 35.3% | — | — | 168 |
| FOS | 2022-H1 | 46.8% | — | — | 71 |
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.