Sharrocks: most-reported complaints
Automated analysis of 263 public Trustpilot reviews published 2018-04-03 to 2026-09-22. TrustScore 4.9 from 3,764 total reviews — see the Trustpilot page. Quick answer: is Sharrocks legit? Issues below reflect what reviewers reported, not findings of wrongdoing.
Reviewers most often report that support is unhelpful, with 12 complaints noting issues such as undisclosed policy requirements. Support being unreachable was the second most common concern, cited in 8 instances where customers struggled to get responses via email. Other frequent complaints involve operational changes, like reduced office hours, and concerns about premium competitiveness, each accounting for 7 reports.
How to reach Sharrocks
These are the contact details Sharrocks publishes on its Trustpilot profile, as of our last check on 2026-09-24 — phone 01795 580 800, address High Street, Sheerness, ME12 1UD, GB.
The company claimed its Trustpilot profile on 2017-09-15, uses Trustpilot’s paid features, and last replied to a negative review on 2026-02-18 — more than six months ago. Trustpilot ranks it 27 of 170 in Insurance Broker. We last checked this profile on 2026-09-24 and found 2 new reviews. These are facts Trustpilot publishes about the profile, as of our last harvest.
Forum footprint: 1 MoneySavingExpert forum discussions mention this company (browse). Roughly 0 of the top, relevance-sorted search results were posted in the last 90 days — an approximate figure by construction, not a true recency count. Recent thread titles: “Sharroks Insureance”.
Elsewhere: 4.7★ on Google (3 reviews)
TrustScore over time
4.9 → 4.9 across 9 census measurements since 2026-08-12. Our own record, independent of Trustpilot’s display.
Reply behaviour over time
Solid: % of negative reviews replied to. Dashed: typical days to reply. Both as reported on this company’s Trustpilot profile, recorded whenever our census re-checked it and a figure had changed — the gaps between points are not equal: 2026-08-27 (100%, 2.7d) · 2026-08-30 (100%, 2.7d) · 2026-09-02 (100%, 2.7d) · 2026-09-08 (100%, 2.7d) · 2026-09-11 (100%, 2.7d) · 2026-09-17 (100%, 2.7d) · 2026-09-21 (100%, 2.7d) · 2026-09-24 (100%, 2.7d).
Severity: 12% of this company’s 42 graded complaints were classified as severe (money lost, an essential service cut off, or a problem unresolved for months). See the harm index.
Reviewers here waited a median of 0.9 days between the experience and publishing their negative review (29 reviews record both dates).
Measured reply time: across 26 negative reviews that received a public reply, the median wait was 0.2 days — the company profile reports an average of 3 days. The two are measured differently: ours counts only replies we captured to negative reviews.
Reply quality: of 26 company replies to negative reviews analysed, 35% engaged with the specific problem and 35% were generic templates.
14% of its 197 recent 5★ reviews came from accounts that had written only that one review when we captured it (the median across companies is about 39%). A high share is a reason to look closer, not evidence of fake reviews.
Sector benchmark: support unhelpful makes up 29% of this company’s complaints vs a 28% median across 148 ranked companies in its sector.
Review velocity: 226 of this company’s 3,764 Trustpilot reviews (6%) were written in the last 12 months.
What are the most common complaints about Sharrocks?
Support unhelpful
12 reports · 29% of complaintsrising since 2024-10“sold a policy that required advanced security systems we were never told about”
The company replied on 2025-12-16: “Thank you for your review. We are disappointed you are unhappy and as always with any feedback, we will use this as an opportunity to assess and improve if necessary. While we are unable to comment…”
Our classifier read this reply as a deflection.
“they told me I would be sent a renewal notice but never received it.”
“I have heard nothing since except communications addressed to both my husband and myself.”
The company replied on 2026-02-18: “We are grateful for your feedback and please accept our sincere apologies for the issues you encountered, we are very sorry and have carried out a full review to ensure our service is better going…”
Our classifier read this reply as a template response.
Support unreachable
8 reports · 19% of complaintsrising since 2024-10“Not happy cancelled the policy but money taken anyway Have to ask our bank to refund us no So well done Ignoring my emails is not on really”
“I have heard nothing since except communications addressed to both my husband and myself.”
The company replied on 2026-02-18: “We are grateful for your feedback and please accept our sincere apologies for the issues you encountered, we are very sorry and have carried out a full review to ensure our service is better going…”
Our classifier read this reply as a template response.
“I have had to chase up for my documents a month after renewal”
The company replied on 2024-10-24: “We are very sorry for the inconvenience you experienced. This is not our normal level of service. We were unfortunately affected by some unexpected staff absence and this resulted in some delays this…”
Our classifier read this reply as a template response.
Other
7 reports · 17% of complaintsrising since 2024-10“what went wrong this time was that i was told that the office is only open Tuesdays and Wednesdays now”
The company replied on 2024-11-20: “Good evening. Thank you for taking the time to leave this feedback. Our teams, based across the UK, have been working from home since 2020. As is commonplace these days, we now run a hybrid system…”
Our classifier read this reply as a deflection.
“I didn't get a confirmation email confirming that they had received my signed documents”
The company replied on 2018-08-14: “Good Morning, I can confirm you are on cover, but we haven't received your statement of fact. If you could send it directly to - [email protected] I will personally add it to your file…”
Our classifier read this reply as a substantive response.
It promised: to make contact.
“poor paperwork for Landlord insurance”
Overcharging
7 reports · 17% of complaintssteady“No longer competitive with their premiums”
“my insurance premium rose by 15% from last year for no apparent reason other than seemingly profit.”
“my insurance premium has increased by 53%”
Warranty disputes
5 reports · 12% of complaintsfalling“12 months and still waiting.”
The company replied on 2023-10-31: “It is not normal for a claim to take this long. Data protection prevents us from providing a full public response, but we are sorry your claim has not been brought to a resolution sooner. As a…”
Our classifier read this reply as a substantive response.
“refused to honour the policy.”
The company replied on 2021-04-08: “We’re really sorry to see this review as we did try our best to help and support you, including replying several times out of hours. Your assertion that we refused to honour the policy simply is not…”
Our classifier read this reply as a deflection.
“The underwriters refused to pay.”
Subscription trap
3 reports · 7% of complaintsfalling“they told me I would be sent a renewal notice but never received it.”
“verry late with contacting us and no e-mail sent renewal on the date stated”
The company replied on 2021-09-01: “Thank you for taking the time to leave this feedback. Your renewal was sent out by email in good time beforehand, and has been forwarded on to you again. We also tried to contact you by phone in…”
Our classifier read this reply as a deflection.
“Did not take heed of my email stating that I did not want to renew my policy”
The company replied on 2021-08-27: “Good evening. We have sent you an email following this feedback after the inconvenience our automated system has caused you. As mentioned in the email, as a further gesture - on top of the immediate…”
Our classifier read this reply as a substantive response.
Compare Sharrocks with…
Method: reviews are classified into a fixed complaint taxonomy by an automated reader; every category shown is backed by at least two verbatim quotes from distinct reviews. Trends are computed from dated review counts only. Negative reviews are deliberately over-sampled for evidence depth; headline percentages use an unbiased recent sample only. Report updated 2026-09-24.