AI Is Expanding The Paperwork Load On Britain’s Bureaucracy

🔍 Read the full analysis: AI Is Expanding The Paperwork Load On Britain’s Bureaucracy on ThorstenMeyerAI.com

Before you orderOffer from Amazon

Get the latest gadgets delivered free with Prime

• Fast, free delivery on millions of items
• Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
• Member-only deals all year

Start your free Prime trial →Free trial for eligible customers · Cancel anytime

As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.Hide

A Sky News report published October 20 finds that complaints, Freedom of Information requests and employment tribunal claims have increased across several UK public services since ChatGPT launched in November 2022. The report says the rise is adding to the workload of officials who handle written submissions, while stressing that the figures do not establish that AI caused the increases.

Sky News technology correspondent Rowland Manthorpe compared trends across channels where people submit requests or complaints in writing. The largest increase listed was in household complaints about water companies, up 144% since ChatGPT launched. Complaints to English local authorities rose 78%, written complaints to GP practices 71%, and complaints to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) 64%. Individual employment tribunal claims increased 62% over the same period.

The report also lists increases in complaints about legal services, up 49%; written complaints to the NHS, up 35%; complaints about police forces, up 34%; and complaints about public services, up 23%. These are changes in separate channels, not proof that AI accounts for the growth. Each service has its own circumstances, and Sky News notes that some sectors, including water companies, have faced other pressures.

A survey of civil servants cited in the report found that 58% said AI-generated content from the public significantly affects their work. Manthorpe also tested 100 recent FOI requests with an AI-text checker: it labelled 89% fully AI-written and 9% human. A smaller group of requests from 2019 was labelled entirely human. The report cautions that AI detectors are unreliable, and this limited test cannot establish the authorship of all requests or prove a causal link to the broader rise.

More Claims, Same Public-Service Systems

The reported increase matters because many public services still depend on people explaining their case in letters, forms and written appeals. If AI lowers the effort required to prepare those submissions, more people may be able to challenge decisions or pursue complaints. That can expose legitimate problems, but it also means public bodies may have to process more material with existing systems and staffing.

The distinction between volume and merit is central. The Sky News report says the proportion of DWP complaints upheld has fallen from figures in the 50% range to close to 40%. That is a lower share, but it does not mean the total number of valid complaints has fallen: the report says a larger volume can still produce more upheld cases in absolute terms. Making submissions harder could reduce workload while also deterring people with valid claims.

The pressure is likely to grow if AI tools move from drafting messages to submitting them automatically. Such systems could make routine appeals easier to file at scale. Whether that leads to better access, unmanageable backlogs, or both will depend on how services receive, sort and assess requests—not simply on whether the text was written by a person or a chatbot.

From ChatGPT Drafts to Automated Claims

The report describes a shift in the data after years in which FOI request levels had changed little. Across multiple complaint and claims channels, Sky News says the pattern is a long period of relative flatness followed by increases from around late 2022. The timing coincides with the public release of ChatGPT, but coincidence is not proof of cause; changes in service quality, public awareness and other factors may also affect complaint numbers.

In May, the Information Commissioner’s Office issued guidance after public authorities reported higher volumes and more complex AI-written FOI requests. The regulator said such requests remain valid and authorities do not need to determine whether AI wrote them. It also said officials can seek clarification when a request is unclear or poorly formed.

The report describes current use mainly as people asking chatbots to draft text, then submitting it themselves. AI agents could go further by taking actions for users. It also cites researcher Chris Schmitz’s work, reported by TechCrunch in September, which identified 84 possible cases of what he calls “agentic flooding” across 11 jurisdictions. The examples included rising complaint volumes in some places, but the cases do not by themselves show that automated AI agents caused every increase.

“It’s like being bombarded with correspondence at speed.”

— Civil servants surveyed in research cited by Sky News

What the Rising Figures Cannot Prove

The figures show increases across several channels, but the source material does not provide full underlying datasets, detailed definitions for every measure, or a common comparison period beyond “since ChatGPT launched.” It is therefore difficult to compare the size of the rises directly or establish how much of each increase is attributable to AI rather than other changes.

The text-checker exercise is also limited: AI detectors can misclassify human writing and AI-assisted text, and the sample of 100 recent FOI requests is not evidence about every request. It remains unclear how many submissions were generated by AI, how many were edited by people, and how often the technology changed whether someone filed a claim at all.

The report presents evidence that many complaints and claims concern genuine entitlements or service problems, but it does not establish the merits of every submission. Nor does the supplied material give a detailed government response, a complete estimate of the added cost to public bodies, or a timetable for changes to application systems.

Public Services Face a Design Choice

The immediate task for public bodies is to handle rising written volumes while maintaining access for people with valid complaints and claims. The ICO’s May guidance already sets out that AI-written FOI requests remain valid and that clarification can be sought when wording is unclear. The report does not identify a new national policy announcement or a specific implementation deadline.

Loosemore’s proposed direction is to rely less on essays and more on structured data, so applicants can provide the information a service needs without composing a lengthy narrative. He warns against adding barriers to submissions, arguing that companies developing AI could find ways around them. That is an argument for service redesign, not a confirmed government plan.

Further reporting will be needed to determine whether complaint and request volumes continue to rise, how many cases are upheld in absolute numbers, and whether public bodies change their processes as AI agents become more capable. For now, the central unresolved issue is how to absorb more demand without screening out people who have a legitimate case.

Key Questions

What did the Sky News report find?

It reported increases in complaints, FOI requests and employment tribunal claims across several UK public-service channels since ChatGPT launched in November 2022. The report does not establish that AI caused those increases.

Does the report prove that AI caused the rise?

No. The timing and pattern are consistent with AI making written submissions easier, but other factors may have contributed. The AI-text checker test was small, and the report notes that such detectors are unreliable.

Are AI-written FOI requests valid?

According to guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office published in May, AI-written requests are still valid. Authorities do not need to establish who or what wrote them, though they can ask for clarification when a request is unclear.

Are the additional complaints mostly frivolous?

The report does not say that every submission is valid. It cites researcher Chris Schmitz’s view that most cases in his research involve people claiming something they are entitled to, and reports that around 40% of DWP complaints are upheld. That figure is a share, not a count of all valid complaints.

What could public services change?

Tom Loosemore argues for replacing lengthy written explanations with structured ways to provide information. The report describes that as a proposed approach; it does not report a confirmed UK-wide change or timetable.

Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com