The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman says sustained demand has left some complaints waiting up to 25 weeks before allocation to a Complaints Reviewer, though urgent and vulnerable cases are being prioritised.
Scotland’s public complaints watchdog has warned that some complaints may now wait up to 25 weeks before being allocated to a Complaints Reviewer, as sustained demand continues to place pressure on the body responsible for reviewing unresolved complaints about public services.
The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman published the current allocation warning on Friday 8 May 2026, telling complainants that the delay affects some cases because of a significant and sustained increase in demand. The SPSO said it is continuing to improve how it delivers its service and is working to ensure it has the resources needed to deal with the increase.
The notice is brief, but its implications are not.
The SPSO is the point many people reach only after something has already gone wrong elsewhere. It considers complaints about Scottish public bodies, including councils, health services, housing providers, prisons, colleges, universities and other organisations within its remit. For citizens who have already been through an internal complaints process, the Ombudsman can represent the final formal route for independent review.
A delay of up to 25 weeks before allocation is therefore more than an administrative inconvenience. It is a measure of strain inside Scotland’s public accountability system.
The SPSO’s more detailed information on delays says not all complaints are affected. It states that cases are actively prioritised where the person affected is vulnerable, where the matter is urgent and ongoing, or where there is significant public interest. The office also says there are no delays in allocating reviews for the Scottish Welfare Fund or for the Independent National Whistleblowing Officer.
That qualification matters. The Ombudsman is not saying every complaint will wait 25 weeks, nor is it suggesting that urgent cases are being placed into the same queue as lower priority matters. It is, however, telling the public plainly that some non priority complaints may have to wait for many months before they are allocated to a reviewer.
The pressure appears to have been building for some time. According to the SPSO, the number of public service complaints it received increased by 33 percent in 2023 to 2024 compared with the previous year. In 2024 to 2025, it saw a further 7 percent increase. Demand has remained high into 2025 to 2026, with provisional in year data showing that by the end of Quarter 3, at the end of December 2025, the office had received 31 percent more public service complaints than at the same point the previous year, and 58 percent more than the pre Covid baseline year of 2019 to 2020.
Those figures point to something larger than one office’s workload. They suggest a rising volume of unresolved public service dissatisfaction reaching Scotland’s final complaints body.
The SPSO says it assesses each complaint to identify whether it should be prioritised, resolved quickly, or handled in another way. Complaints that cannot be prioritised or addressed quickly are held until they can be allocated. People affected by delays are being informed and are encouraged to contact the Ombudsman if their circumstances change or if they believe their complaint should be given priority.
That is a practical safeguard, but it also places some responsibility back on the complainant to recognise and report changing circumstances. For vulnerable people, or those already dealing with distressing public service failures, that may not always be simple.
The Ombudsman says it has increased output. In 2024 to 2025, it increased complaints output by 12 percent year on year and closed more cases than it received. Into 2025 to 2026, provisional data to the end of Quarter 3 showed productivity had increased by 14 percent against the same period the previous year.
That gives the story its necessary balance. The SPSO is not presenting itself as idle or indifferent. It says it is managing demand carefully, improving efficiency, and focusing on resolving cases as quickly as possible. It has also put the delay information into the public domain, which is preferable to leaving complainants in the dark.
But transparency does not remove the public interest question. If Scotland’s complaints watchdog is dealing with demand high enough to create a wait of up to 25 weeks for some case allocation, then the issue belongs not only to the Ombudsman. It also belongs to the public bodies whose decisions, delays, failures or complaint handling may be driving more people to seek independent review.
The SPSO’s own published findings often point to recurring problems in public administration, including communication, follow up, delay and inconsistent complaint handling. In March 2026, for example, the Ombudsman highlighted cases where timely follow up and consistent communication remained important areas for improvement.
That is where the current delay becomes especially uncomfortable. A complaints system exists because people need somewhere to go when they believe a public body has failed them. If the review body itself becomes heavily delayed, the citizen can experience a second wait after the first grievance.
There is no need to inflate this into scandal. The SPSO has set out the position openly. It says priority cases are being identified, and it has explained that some specialist routes are not affected by allocation delays. Yet the fact remains that a person with a non priority complaint may be waiting nearly half a year before a reviewer is assigned.
For many citizens, the distinction between allocation and resolution will matter little in practical terms. A complaint that has not yet been allocated is still a complaint waiting for movement. A person who has already exhausted a public body’s own process may reasonably ask how long accountability should take.
The wider question for Scotland is whether rising complaint numbers reflect greater public awareness, deteriorating service experience, weaker internal complaint handling, or some combination of all three. The SPSO data alone cannot answer that. But it does show that more pressure is reaching the final stage of the complaints system.
That should concern ministers, councils, health boards and every public organisation whose decisions may eventually land before the Ombudsman. A high volume of complaints does not automatically prove failure. But sustained increases in complaints, alongside lengthy allocation delays, suggest a system that needs attention well before cases arrive at the final door.
For now, the advice to complainants is straightforward. Those whose circumstances change, or who believe their case has become urgent, should tell the SPSO so that priority can be reviewed. Those who no longer wish to pursue a complaint are also asked to inform the office.
For everyone else, the public message is less comforting. Scotland’s final complaints backstop is still open. It is still prioritising urgent and vulnerable cases. But for some citizens seeking review of a public service complaint, the wait before allocation may now stretch to 25 weeks.
That is not merely a delay. It is a warning light on the machinery of public accountability.
