I know that all finite-dimension Hausdorff topological vector spaces are complete.
I would like to know if there is a example of a topological vector space (over the real or complex numbers) that is not Hausdorff and is also not complete.
I tried to build a counter example, but I couldn't. First, I tried to put the topology generated by the basis $\mathscr{B}=\{(-a,a)\times \mathbb{R}: a>0\}$ in $\mathbb{R}^2$, but this space is complete. Then I tried to take a known example of non-complete space, so I chose the product topology with infinite copies of $\mathbb{R}$, but this space has no finite dimension and is Hausdorff.
Let $V$ be a TVS and denote with $N$ the closure of $\{0\}$, this is again a vector sub-space as it is the closure of a vector sub-space. Further, every open neighbourhood of $0$ contains all of $N$ (and so does every open neighbourhood of any point in $N$). I'll carry this last comment out in more detail, suppose $x,y\in N$, if $U$ is an open neighbourhood of $x$ not containing $y$ you have that $U-y$ is an open neighbourhood of $x-y$ not containing $0$. But $x-y\in N$ and $N$ is the closure of $\{0\}$ and every open neighbourhood of points in $N$ must intersect $\{0\}$, contradiction.
Now $V/N$ is a quotient of a topological group by a closed sub-group, hence it is Hausdorff by general facts. In other words $V/N$ is a Hausdorff TVS, since it is also finite dimensional it is complete.
So let $x_\alpha$ be a Cauchy net in $V$, meaning that for any neighbourhood $U$ of $0$ you have a $\gamma$ so that $x_\alpha - x_\beta\in U$ for all $\alpha, \beta ≥\gamma$. By continuity of the projection map you have that $[x_\alpha]$ has the same property in $V/N$, hence admits a limit $[x]$ by completeness. We will now see that any lift $x$ of $[x]$ is a limit of $x_\alpha$.
As we have seen $[x_\alpha - x]$ eventually lies in every neighbourhood of $[0]$, meaning that $x_\alpha-x+N$ eventually lies in $U+N$ for every neighbourhood $U$ of $0$. But by what we have seen in the first paragraph $U\supseteq N$ hence $x_\alpha - x$ eventually lies in $U$. This shows $x_\alpha\to x$.