lordswrans/lordswrans2025-03-10 conversation_85
Source: hansard.parliament.uk (2025-03-10)

UK Parliament Hansard data: lordswrans/lordswrans2025-03-10 conversation_85

Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton:To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Coaker on 14 February (HL4757), what assessment the Service Complaints Ombudsman has made, if any, of (1) the average to time required to process a service complaint, and (2) how many different transfers between individuals a single complaint may pass. \p Lord Coaker: Statistics regarding the timeliness and average time taken to close a Service Complaint can be found in the annual statistical tables published by the Service Complaints Ombudsman for the Armed Forces (SCOAF). The tables can be round below.

Whilst the SCOAF has not made a specific assessment on the transfers that take place between individuals during the course of a Service Complaint, the implementation of a new Service Complaints Case Management System and the introduction of regular workshops between the Services and the SCOAF will ensure that working practices are standardised.

Service Complaints Ombudsman For the Armed Forces Annual Statistical Tables

Table 1.13a: Average¹ time taken² to complete³ ⁴ ⁵ an investigation,

by case type and year closed, 2018-2023

Year

Admissibility Decision

ADM_RevChk

Undue Delay

DEL_RevChk

Maladministration

MAL_RevChk

Substance

SUB_RevChk

2018⁴

6.1

ʳ

5.7

ʳ

60

ʳ

58

ʳ

2019⁵

3.7

ʳ

3.7

ʳ

78

ʳ

75

ʳ

2020⁵

3.4

ʳ

3.7

ʳ

81

ʳ

82

ʳ

2021⁵

3.8

ʳ

4.2

ʳ

52

52

2022⁵

3.9

ʳ

4.1

ʳ

34

34

2023⁵

3.2

3.5

28

28

% annual change 2023

-18%

-15%

-18%

-18%

ʳ revised from Annual Statistical Tables 2022

1 Mean.

2 Number of weeks.

3 Includes the time an investigation is delayed by when it is unallocated to an investigator.

4 Includes investigations closed at the mid investigation case review.

5 Excludes investigation applications declined at triage.

Source: SCOAF casework

Table 1.13b: Average¹ time² a caseworker had spent on a (completed) investigation³ ⁴ ⁵

by case type and year closed, 2018-2023

Year

Admissibility Decision

ADM_RevChk

Undue Delay

DEL_RevChk

Maladministration

MAL_RevChk

Substance

SUB_RevChk

2018³

3.7

3.4

56

54

2019⁴

2.7

2.7

39

33

2020⁴

2.5

2.9

25

24

2021⁴

2.6

3.2

20

20

2022⁴

2.5

2.7

17

17

2023⁴

2.1

2.6

14

14

% annual change 2023

-16%

-4%

-18%

-18%

1 Mean.

2 Number of weeks.

3 Includes investigations closed at the mid investigation case review.

4 Excludes investigation applications declined at triage.

Source: SCOAF casework

Table 1.13c: Average¹ time² a completed investigation³ ⁴ ⁵

had spent unallocated to caseworker, by case type and year of closure, 2018-2023

Year

Admissibility Decision

ADM_RevChk

Undue Delay

DEL_RevChk

Maladministration

MAL_RevChk

Substance

SUB_RevChk

2018³

2.4

2.3

4

4

2019⁴

1.0

1.0

39

42

2020⁴

0.9

0.8

57

58

2021⁴

1.2

1.0

32

32

2022⁴

1.4

1.4

16

17

2023⁴

1.2

1.0

14

14

% annual change 2023

-14%

-29%

-13%

-18%

1 Mean.

2 Number of weeks.

3 Includes investigations closed at the mid investigation case review.

4 Excludes investigation applications declined at triage.

Source: SCOAF casework