Media FAQ

We consider all complaints that come to us. Even if we decide not to investigate a complaint, we keep information about it. This helps us identify any wider public service issues that need improvements. 

We carry out initial checks to make sure we can deal with a complaint. This includes checking we can investigate the organisation and the issue leading to the complaint and that the complainant has already been through the organisation’s own complaints process.   

We then take a closer look to decide if we should investigate. We look at whether the complainant has been affected personally by what happened, whether they have complained (to us or an MP) within a year of knowing about the issue and whether they have (or had) the option of taking legal action instead.  

Demand for our service has increased substantially. To manage this, we need to carefully consider all complaints we receive. We look at whether the issue aligns with our organisational priorities or if it is in the wider public interest to investigate it. This is so that we can make sure we’re having the greatest impact on public services while providing the best value. 

We also consider if the complainant has a protected personal characteristic, such as age, ethnicity, sex or religion, which is underrepresented in the complaints we receive or if the issue affects a marginalised group. 

If we can't take the complaint forward, we provide information about what the complainant can do next. This might include giving advice about how to complain to the organisation they’re unhappy with, if they haven't done this already.  

In the reporting year 2024 to 2025, we received 123,987 enquiries and worked on 38,045 complaints.  

Current wait times are: 

• up to four months for complaints about the NHS
• up to seven months for complaints about UK Government departments. 

Demand for our service has increased substantially in recent years. Despite the continued high demand, we have continued to improve the waiting time for decisions. 

The number of complaints that require an investigation has increased every year since 2020. In 2024 to 2025, 9,692 complaints required an investigation. Of those that required a detailed investigation, we upheld or partly upheld 545 (75%) complaints. 

We are carrying out research in 2026 to better understand the causes of demand. These are some of the factors we believe have driven an increase in the number of complaints: 

Pressures within public service delivery 

Wider systemic challenges such as:  

• capacity constraints
• demographic changes
• workforce shortages
• rising service expectations which often lead to more errors
• delays and other unsatisfactory experiences that generate complaints.

Increasing public awareness and accessibility 

We continue to work towards improving awareness of our organisation and the accessibility of our service to reduce barriers for those who need us.  

Growing use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) by complainants 

There has been a significant increase in the use of generative AI to produce complaint submissions. These can increase volume, raise expectations of rapid resolution, and increase complexity if the content is unclear or includes inaccuracies. 

Many of the complaints that come to us are not ready to be looked at, are out of time or are about organisations we cannot investigate (due to limitations in our jurisdiction). We explain to people what we can and cannot achieve when looking at complaints so they can make informed decisions about whether our process is right for them.  

We consider all complaints that are brought to us. Where we are unable to take them further, we will explain why this is the case and what the complainant could do next. There are several reasons why we might not be able to look at a complaint: 

Out of time 

(863 received in 2024-25) 

There are time limits for bringing a complaint to us which are set out in law. In addition to this, there are good reasons for not investigating older complaints. For example, evidence may no longer be accessible, and people’s recollections of events may not be reliable. These factors can inhibit effective investigation. We are able to take various factors into consideration when deciding whether a complaint is out of time. This includes personal circumstances, complainants’ health, family bereavement and whether the organisation they originally complained to processed the complaint in time. 

Premature 

(24,625 received in 2024-25) 

Due to our legislation, we can’t normally look at a complaint until the complainant has exhausted the complaints process at the organisation in question. 

Not properly made 

(13,393 closed in 2024-25) 

We can’t look at complaints until they are properly made. This means complaints about government departments must come via an MP and all complaints must be made in writing. 

Legal action 

(1,204 closed in 2024-25) 

By law, we cannot investigate a complaint if someone can take legal action instead. We look at each case individually to decide a) whether they could make a legal claim and b) whether it’s reasonable for them to do so. 

Impact 

(1,394 received in 2024-25) 

We handle thousands of enquiries every year. We cannot take every complaint through to detailed investigation. Some complaints are resolved early on and do not need to be fully investigated. After that, we must focus on the more serious complaints that people bring to us where they may have faced a big impact. For example, these may be about a potentially avoidable death, where someone has suffered prolonged pain, or where someone has experienced prolonged hardship because they missed out on benefits they were entitled to. This approach is consistent with other UK Ombudsman services. 

We also consider: 

• if the issue aligns with our organisational priorities or is in the wider public interest. This could include if we are seeing a lot of similar complaints
• if the complainant has a protected personal characteristic, such as age, ethnicity, sex or religion, that is underrepresented in the complaints we see and/or the issue mainly affects a marginalised group
• the number of complaints we are receiving at the time. 

We look at whether we are able to resolve a complaint before it reaches investigation stage. From April 2024 to March 2025, 28,311 complaints were dealt with this way. Sometimes, organisations put things right for the complainant or make service improvements during a primary investigation, which means the issue no longer needs to be investigated. We also resolve complaints through our mediation process.  

In the same time period, we upheld or partly upheld 75% of complaints which progressed to detailed investigation. 

There are several factors that affect how long an investigation takes. These include the complexity of the case, the amount of evidence to be considered and how quickly organisations respond to our requests for evidence. On average, primary investigations take 6.5 months, and detailed investigations take 19.5 months. 

Public services are complex and we need to consider all the evidence and speak to all involved parties. We are working to improve our technology and make service improvements so that we can provide the best possible service for people. 

Consistent with previous years, in 2024 to 2025 we made decisions on 99% of complaints following initial checks within seven days. This was against a target of 95%. For complaints that we considered further we made decisions on:  

• 43% within 13 weeks
• 69% within 26 weeks
• 89% within 52 weeks. 

86% (8,358) of the complaints we investigated in 2024 to 2025 were NHS cases and 14% (1,334) were about government departments and national agencies cases. 

By law, we are required to investigate in private. This means we can’t discuss a case if we are looking into it, nor can we confirm or deny that we have received a complaint. 

We use our severity of injustice scale to determine the seriousness of a complaint. It allows us to make sure the recommendations we make are consistent and transparent for everyone who uses our service. We cannot provide any financial compensation ourselves; we may recommend that it is provided by the organisation responsible. 

In deciding what to recommend, we look to put the person affected back into a position where they would have been, had the service failing not occurred. If this is not possible (for example, where the injustice comprises distress or unnecessary pain), we may suggest that a financial payment is made to the complainant. 

If a complaint relates to a direct financial loss (such as wrongly imposed care home fees or wrongly withheld benefit payments), we will recommend the organisation reimburses the amount the complainant has lost, including any interest due.  

We work on behalf of Parliament and our powers are limited by law. We can make recommendations to an organisation, but we can’t force an organisation to comply. If an organisation refuses to comply, which is rare, we can ask Parliament to intervene.