Defence has finalised new rules for how service complaints are investigated. The Armed Forces Commissioner (Service Complaints Investigations) Regulations 2026 (SI 2026/24) were made on 8 January 2026, laid before Parliament on 15 January 2026, and come into force on 1 April 2026 across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. The instrument revokes and re‑enacts the 2015 Ombudsman regulations to align the scheme with the Armed Forces Commissioner Act 2025, which replaces the Service Complaints Ombudsman with the Armed Forces Commissioner.
Under section 340A of the Armed Forces Act 2006, a person subject to service law, or who has ceased to be subject to service law, may raise a service complaint. Section 340H allows a complainant to apply to the Commissioner to investigate a disputed decision, alleged maladministration (including undue delay), or undue delay in relation to a complaint or a relevant service matter. The Regulations define key terms and confirm that specified procedural actions must be carried out by post or electronic means.
Applications must be precise when seeking an investigation into the merits of a decision under section 340H(1)(a). The complainant must identify the parts of the decision that are disputed, set out reasons, and state what redress is considered appropriate. Copies of the relevant decision, appeal determination or reconsideration decision under the Armed Forces (Service Complaints) Regulations 2015 must be attached. The application must also state the date it is made and, if late, the reason for lateness.
For investigations into maladministration under section 340H(1)(b), the complainant must specify the maladministration alleged, including any undue delay, the injustice suffered or potentially suffered, and the facts relied upon. For undue delay applications under section 340H(1)(c) or (d), the complainant must set out the delay, any resulting or potential injustice, and the supporting facts. An application is deemed made on the day it is posted or sent electronically to the Commissioner.
A six‑week time limit applies to applications under section 340H(1)(a) or (b), running from the relevant date. That date is the notification of the appeal determination where an appeal has been determined; the notification that an appeal cannot proceed for want of a valid ground where no review is sought; the Commissioner’s notification upholding that decision on review; or, where there are no grounds of appeal, the notification of the original decision. Receipt of a notification is deemed to occur on the second day after posting or electronic sending. The Commissioner may accept late applications where it is just and equitable.
Once an application is received, the Commissioner must decide under section 340I(1) whether to begin an investigation and notify the complainant and the Defence Council with reasons. If a late application is accepted, the decision must explain why that is just and equitable. If maladministration becomes apparent during an investigation, the Commissioner may investigate it under section 340H(7), notifying the complainant and the Defence Council with reasons. Where an investigation is opened, a copy of the application must be sent to the Defence Council.
The complainant may withdraw an application at any time before the investigation concludes. On receiving a withdrawal notice, the Commissioner must send a copy to the Defence Council and decide whether to begin, continue or discontinue the investigation, giving reasons to the complainant and the Defence Council.
For evidence gathering, the Commissioner may require documents or information within a reasonable period and in a specified form or manner. If material is not provided on time or in the specified way, the Commissioner may nonetheless complete the investigation and prepare a report under section 340L.
Procedural fairness is set out expressly. The Defence Council, any person alleged to be responsible for maladministration, any person who is the subject of the complaint, and anyone likely to be criticised in relation to their character or professional reputation must be given an opportunity to comment on relevant matters. Oral hearings, where held, are private by default unless the Commissioner considers a public hearing necessary, and reasonable restrictions on attendance or reporting may be imposed.
Representation at a hearing, including by a legally qualified person, may be permitted where necessary for a fair determination or to protect rights and interests. The Commissioner may pay those who attend to give evidence for expenses properly incurred and allowances for loss of time, excluding any legal fees.
The reporting process allows for draft circulation. The Commissioner may share a draft report with the complainant and the persons identified above and may address comments in the final report. Clerical mistakes or accidental slips may be corrected by certificate under the Commissioner’s hand. Copies of the final report must be sent to the subject of the complaint and to any person criticised in the findings or recommendations, in addition to the statutory duty under section 340L(5) to send the report to the complainant and the Defence Council.
Confidentiality obligations may be imposed on recipients of draft or final reports where appropriate and lawful. Grounds include situations where disclosure would be against the interests of national security or might jeopardise the safety of any person.
Subsequent applications following a reconsideration under section 340M may be investigated to the extent they relate to that reconsideration. The application must be made within six weeks of notification of the decision under the 2015 Service Complaints Regulations, although the Commissioner may accept late applications if just and equitable. Notification is again deemed received on the second day after posting or electronic sending.
Transitional and savings provisions ensure continuity when functions transfer from the Service Complaints Ombudsman to the Commissioner on 1 April 2026. Acts and matters in train with the Ombudsman are treated as done by or in relation to the Commissioner and may continue. Rights, liabilities and obligations, including confidentiality obligations, continue as if arising from the Commissioner’s corresponding acts.
Deeming provisions under the 2015 Ombudsman Regulations-covering when an application was treated as made and when a notification was treated as received-are preserved for the purposes of the 2026 Regulations. Time periods already running before commencement continue, and even where a period expired before commencement, the Commissioner may accept a new application if satisfied that it is just and equitable.
Consequential amendments update cross‑references in the Armed Forces (Service Complaints and Financial Assistance) Act 2015 (Transitional and Savings Provisions) Regulations 2015 so that time‑limit provisions point to the 2026 Regulations. The 2015 Ombudsman Regulations and their 2022 amending instrument are revoked and replaced.
For administrators and commanding officers, the operational requirements are clear. Casework templates should reflect the section 340H content requirements; deadlines should be managed to the six‑week rule and deemed‑receipt rules; and records should capture the dates of posting or electronic sending. Arrangements should be in place for document requests in specified formats and for hearings, representation and the payment of expenses.
For serving personnel and veterans, the scheme remains familiar but is administered by a new office‑holder. Existing cases will continue without restarting under the Armed Forces Commissioner Act 2025. Applicants should ensure submissions are complete-especially the remedy sought and the facts supporting any allegation of maladministration or undue delay-to make best use of the six‑week window.
The Ministry of Defence has not produced a full impact assessment, stating that no, or no significant, impact on the private, voluntary or public sector is foreseen.