A lower uphold rate, but also fewer decisions
In the most recent 90-day window measured by Veste, 308 published Financial Ombudsman decisions involving HSBC UK Bank Plc were recorded, with 15.9% resulting in an uphold (fully or partially in the complainant's favour). In the prior 90-day window, there were 390 decisions with an uphold rate of 21.8%. That is a fall of 5.9 percentage points, alongside a drop of 82 decisions, a 21.0% decline in volume. Both windows meet Veste's minimum sample threshold of 30 decisions, so the comparison is not resting on a handful of cases. But a fall of this size, on a shrinking sample, deserves scrutiny before it is read as a shift in how HSBC's disputes are being resolved.
The uphold rate here is calculated as (upheld plus half of partially upheld) divided by total decisions, in line with Veste's standard definition. It captures the full range of outcomes, not just full uphold decisions.
The numbers in context
Across the entire published record for HSBC UK Bank Plc, Veste has logged 7,532 decisions since the firm's first appearance on 2018-12-11, running to 2026-06-15. Of these, 1,269 were upheld, 894 partially upheld and 5,369 not upheld, giving an overall uphold rate of 22.8%. That sits below the corpus-wide baseline uphold rate of 28.8% calculated across all 401,815 decisions in Veste's database, covering decisions dated between 2013-04-02 and 2026-06-15. HSBC's decisions, in other words, have historically been upheld somewhat less often than the average firm in the Ombudsman's published dataset, though that comparison spans firms of very different size and complaint mix.
The year-on-year figures show a longer-term pattern that predates the latest 90-day move. In 2022, HSBC's annual uphold rate stood at 28.1% across 1,085 decisions. It fell to 25.5% in 2023 (952 decisions), 23.2% in 2024 (1,011 decisions), 20.7% in 2025 (1,214 decisions), and stands at 18.8% so far in 2026 across 656 decisions. Each of these years meets Veste's minimum sample size. Read together, the annual series shows a steady decline over five years rather than an isolated event in the latest quarter, which puts the 90-day fall in a rather different light: it looks like a continuation of an existing trend, not a break from one.
What the monthly series shows
Veste's monthly trend data for HSBC UK Bank Plc runs across 25 months, from 2024-06-01 to 2026-06-01. Monthly uphold rates and volumes have been volatile throughout this window rather than moving in a straight line. In June 2024, the uphold rate was 24.1% on 56 decisions. It climbed to 28.7% in July 2024 (54 decisions) and 25.9% in August 2024 (54 decisions), before falling to 17.1% in October 2024 (114 decisions) and 15.1% in November 2024 (63 decisions). It then recovered somewhat, reaching 26% in December 2024 (77 decisions).
Through 2025 the pattern continued to oscillate: 19.8% in January (91 decisions), 23.2% in February (69 decisions), 18.7% in March (115 decisions), 22.1% in April (86 decisions), 13.6% in May (81 decisions), 17.2% in June (90 decisions), 15.4% in July (94 decisions), 20.1% in August (97 decisions), then a notable rise to 24.7% in September (146 decisions) and 28.4% in October (97 decisions). November and December 2025 saw 18.9% (119 decisions) and 23.6% (129 decisions) respectively.
The most recent months show a further decline. January 2026 recorded 22.1% (102 decisions), February 20.4% (157 decisions), March 19.9% on the largest monthly volume in the series, 201 decisions. April 2026 fell to 17.8% (73 decisions), May to 11.1% (63 decisions), the lowest monthly rate in the whole 25-month run, and June 2026 to 15% (60 decisions). This run of low readings across April, May and June 2026 aligns with, and largely constitutes, the latest 90-day window that shows the 5.9 point fall. May 2026's 11.1% rate on 63 decisions is a genuinely low reading by the standards of this series, though it sits on a monthly sample below the 90-day comparison windows and should be treated with corresponding caution.
Firm-naming caveat
Veste records firms by the exact business name printed on each Ombudsman decision. That means HSBC UK Bank Plc and HSBC UK Bank PLC, differing only in capitalisation as recorded on individual decisions, are treated as the same entity here where the name matches, but any separately named subsidiary within the same banking group would appear as a distinct entry and is not combined into this analysis. Readers comparing Veste's firm pages should bear this in mind when assessing scale.
What might be driving the movement, and what remains unclear
The supplied data does not identify a single cause for the recent fall. Volume fell by 82 decisions between the two 90-day windows, a 21.0% drop, so part of what is being measured is a smaller and potentially different mix of cases, not simply the same caseload with a different outcome. Whether that reflects fewer complaints reaching a decision, a shift in the type of complaint being escalated, or something else in the publication pipeline is not something this dataset can answer.
Veste's related-category data offers some texture on where HSBC's disputes commonly sit, without allowing any of those categories to be directly attributed to the recent change, since the category figures are corpus-wide across firms and periods, not isolated to HSBC's latest quarter. Fraud reimbursement under the APP scam rules shows an uphold rate of 28.6% across 1,980 decisions in the wider dataset. Service failures generally run at 24.3% across 814 decisions. Account closure without notice stands at 19.6% across 771 decisions, and account administration errors at 20.1% across 753 decisions. Card and payment disputes show 16.4% across 659 decisions, close to HSBC's latest 90-day rate of 15.9%, though this is a general category figure and not specific evidence about HSBC's mix.
Individual decisions as illustration
Four recent decisions naming HSBC UK Bank Plc, all not upheld, help illustrate the kind of disputes reaching publication in this period, though four cases cannot demonstrate a trend.
One case, decided 2026-06-15, concerned a customer who lost £15,980 to a job task scam involving cryptocurrency payments. HSBC had blocked one payment and warned the customer he was likely being scammed, then refunded £8,880 (50% of the first payment plus a full refund from the warning date onwards) plus £300 compensation. The Ombudsman found HSBC should have intervened more robustly but did not uphold the complaint further, because the customer had ignored red flags, been dishonest with the bank about the payments' purpose, and continued sending money after an explicit warning; the existing refund already exceeded what a 50/50 fault split would produce.
A second case, also decided 2026-06-15, involved a customer whose replacement debit and credit cards were sent to a branch after she lost her original cards and phone while in temporary housing. The Ombudsman found HSBC had acted reasonably in directing the cards, provided clear instructions, and handled a subsequent branch closure appropriately by redirecting the cards and notifying the customer, despite some delay and inconvenience.
A third, decided 2026-06-12, concerned a credit card default recorded after a customer failed to make payments, believing a direct debit had been arranged. The Ombudsman found HSBC had made reasonable contact efforts through letters, calls, alerts and texts, with no evidence of misdirected correspondence, and that the default notice process had been followed correctly.
A fourth, also decided 2026-06-12, involved a customer who lost £2,750.97 to a task-based job scam via legitimate money transfer providers between September and October 2025. The Ombudsman found the payments were not unusual in value, frequency or destination and did not follow a pattern typical of scams, so HSBC was not obliged to intervene, and recovery via chargeback or Section 75 would not have succeeded.
These four decisions are all not upheld and cannot be taken as representative of the wider 308-decision window; they are included to show the character of disputes being published, not to prove an outcome rate.
The longer view
Stepping back across the full run of data, from the 2018-12-11 first appearance to 2026-06-15, HSBC UK Bank Plc's overall uphold rate of 22.8% across 7,532 decisions sits below the corpus baseline of 28.8%. The annual figures show a decline from 28.1% in 2022 to 18.8% so far in 2026. Against that backdrop, the latest 90-day fall to 15.9% looks consistent with a multi-year downward drift rather than a one-off dip, though the monthly series shows enough month-to-month volatility, swinging between roughly 11% and 29% over 25 months, that any single quarter should be read cautiously.
What this data does not show
This analysis covers published Ombudsman decisions only, which are not the same population as all complaints made to HSBC. Published decisions represent cases that reached a formal Ombudsman ruling, typically after earlier stages of the complaints process did not resolve matters to the complainant's satisfaction. The data does not indicate how many complaints HSBC receives in total, how quickly it resolves them internally, or the outcome of complaints that never reach a published decision. Nor does it establish that HSBC's underlying handling of complaints changed between the two 90-day windows; a fall in uphold rate alongside a fall in volume is consistent with several explanations, including changes in the mix of cases being escalated, and the supplied data cannot distinguish between them.
Conclusion
The 5.9 percentage point fall in HSBC UK Bank Plc's uphold rate between the two most recent 90-day windows is real in the data, but it arrives at the tail end of a five-year decline visible in the annual figures, from 28.1% in 2022 to 18.8% in the year to date. Readers should treat the latest quarter as one data point in a longer, already-falling series, not as a standalone development, and should note that the accompanying 21.0% drop in decision volume means fewer cases are underpinning the newest rate.