The Armed Forces (Service Complaints Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 were made by the Ministry of Defence on 6 October 2026 and come into force on 3 November 2026. According to the text published on legislation.gov.uk, the instrument was made under sections 340A(4), 340N(4) and 373(5) of the Armed Forces Act 2006. The instrument was signed by Calvin Bailey, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Defence. It was also laid in draft and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament, which means the amendment required affirmative parliamentary approval before it could be made.
The regulations amend the Armed Forces (Service Complaints Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 2015, which govern parts of the service complaints system. The most visible drafting change is the removal of references to the 'appropriate officer' and the insertion of references to the 'appropriate person'. In legal terms, that brings the 2015 regulations into line with section 340N(2) of the Armed Forces Act 2006. In practical terms, responsibility is no longer described only by reference to an officer, but by the person identified under the updated statutory wording, reflecting changes made by the Armed Forces Commissioner Act 2025.
A second amendment changes the list of matters that cannot be pursued as service complaints. Regulation 3 of the 2015 rules is amended so that a decision made under regulations for section 340D(2)(ca), on whether an appeal has been brought on valid grounds, becomes an excluded complaint. That is a technical adjustment, but its effect is direct. A dispute about whether an appeal satisfies the valid-grounds test cannot then be re-routed into the service complaints system as a separate complaint. For complaints handlers and legal advisers, that draws a firmer line between appeal admissibility and the wider complaints process.
The 2026 instrument also recasts part of regulation 6, which deals with notifications to the Commissioner after an allegation has been referred. Under the amended wording, the relevant person must notify the Commissioner that the individual concerned, described as 'P', has been informed that the allegation was referred, that section 340N(3)(b) has been complied with, and whether P wishes to make a service complaint. The explanatory note describes part of this as modernising the drafting. Even so, the change is more than cosmetic because it clarifies what information must be communicated and recorded once a referral has been made.
Regulation 3 of the 2026 instrument addresses cases already under way before commencement. Where an allegation was referred to the appropriate officer before 3 November 2026, it is to be treated from that date as if it had been referred to the appropriate person for the purposes of any notification requirement under regulation 6. The transitional provision also covers notification duties that arose before commencement but had not yet been complied with. That avoids a procedural gap between the previous wording and the new one, and it helps ensure that live cases are not delayed by a purely definitional issue.
The territorial extent is wider than Great Britain alone. The regulations extend to England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man and the British Overseas Territories, with Gibraltar expressly excluded. For service personnel, administrative staff and legal teams working across overseas commands, that matters because it confirms where the amended complaints administration rules will apply from the same commencement date and where separate arrangements may still need to be checked.
The explanatory note states that no full impact assessment has been produced because no, or no significant, impact is expected on the private, voluntary or public sector. That indicates the Ministry of Defence views the measure primarily as a statutory update and implementation step rather than a broad change to complaint rights. Even so, there is a clear administrative task before 3 November 2026. Internal guidance, referral notices and casework templates that still refer to the 'appropriate officer' will need to be updated, and teams dealing with appeal admissibility will need to note that the valid-grounds decision now falls outside the service complaints route.