ANNUAL REPORT 2025 - Trends in complaints

The complaints we review provide important information about the realities of student life and the diversity of the teaching and learning experience available across higher education in England and Wales. They offer us valuable insights and the opportunity for learning and improvement that goes beyond the individual experience.

Complaints are grouped into nine broad categories and we track patterns and trends that emerge, including whether issues are raised more frequently by particular student groups, or within particular types of provision.

Complaints received

Number of complaints received by year

We received 4,234 in total, an increase of 17% on the previous year. This continues the rise of complaints we have seen over the last decade.

The first half of 2025 saw a small rise in receipts compared to 2024, followed by a sharp increase from July 2025 to the end of the year. October 2025 alone saw 516 complaints brought to us, the highest number in a single month in our history.

There was no clear variation in the pattern of what students were complaining about across the year to explain the significant growth in receipts from July 2025 onwards. But there was a change in how quickly students were bringing their complaint to us.

In the latter half of the year, on average students were bringing their complaint to us around three months after receiving a Completion of Procedures Letter from their provider. This was closer to four months at the start of 2025. We welcome this. When students pursue their complaint promptly it can mean that more options are open to resolve it.

The proportion of complaints received about providers in England and about providers in Wales remains consistent with previous years.

Complaints received by area of study – Top 10

The distribution of complaints we have received from students within different fields of study is broadly in proportion to the number of students studying within those fields. Complaints from students on Business and Management courses have risen slightly, reflecting a steady growth in overall student numbers over recent years. Subjects allied to medicine saw a small decrease, which also remains broadly in line with sector numbers. Biological and Sport sciences was the most underrepresented subject area, and Law continues to be the most overrepresented subject area. This could reflect higher levels of confidence from students of Law to engage with formal processes to make complaints or appeals.

Subject-specific provision such as placements, specialist resources or the requirements for students to meet specific professional standards, can influence the type of issues students raise within complaints. For example, we saw Service issues were more common in subjects allied to Engineering and technology, and Design, creative and performing arts. Financial issues were more common in Business and Management, and Law courses.

Complaints received by level of study

Complaints received by student domicile

The breakdown of complaints by level of study and student domicile remains consistent with previous years. There has been no significant change in which students bring complaints to us. This suggests that the main causes of complaint are embedded in the ongoing operation of systems and processes, rather than reflecting the characteristics of a particular intake of students.

International students continue to be overrepresented in complaints to us. Study abroad is a significant investment, financially and personally. As well as complaints about visa issues which can only affect international students, we see more complaints from international students than home students about tuition fees, refunds and deposits. These trends cut across different course types, and are not confined to one level of study. Complaints from international students provide clear signals about where processes can break down, particularly at key transition points such as enrolment and withdrawal. Clear information, accurate advice and careful handling of fees and visas remain essential to reducing complaints in these areas.

There was a small increase in complaints about Financial matters in 2025. Over half of these complaints were from international students, and many were from post-graduate students. Around a third were from students studying on Business and management courses. These patterns are likely to be driven by the high volume of international students undertaking taught Masters in these subject areas, and reflect the high fees that they pay.

We saw complaints from students who were withdrawn from their studies because they did not pay their fees. Where providers have published clear information about what fees must be paid and the deadlines for payments, it is usually reasonable for them to suspend or terminate a student’s enrolment when these conditions are not met. Providers have a responsibility to manage their own financial sustainability and tuition fee income is critical to this. However, it is good practice to signpost students to sources of advice and support if they are having difficulty making payments. Our complaints show that providers will often show some flexibility for students who have engaged with them proactively when difficulties have arisen. Unfortunately, sometimes students can ignore important communications about help that is available until it is too late to benefit from it.

We continued to see evidence that providers are taking their obligations as sponsors of international students’ visas seriously. We reviewed complaints from international students whose studies were terminated because of low attendance at taught sessions. Some students dispute the accuracy of attendance records; others were not sure how to tell their provider about personal circumstances that were impacting on their attendance. Even though providers’ discretion may be limited by their obligations as visa sponsors, providers must still provide a route for students to challenge decisions relating to their attendance or fee payments. Providers should complete this process promptly so that any errors in the information a provider has relied upon are identified before a students’ visa is curtailed.

We reviewed a small number of complaints from international students who were pursuing asylum claims and who were seeking the return of their tuition fees. A common response from providers was to invite the student to continue their studies while their claim was being processed, or to suspend their studies and hold the fees that had already been paid against a future enrolment. In the cases we reviewed, we considered these responses were reasonable.

Complaints received by category

We categorise the types of complaint we received under the nine broad headings above. Academic appeals can cover individual assessment results, resit opportunities, progression decisions, and degree classification calculations and it remains the largest category of complaints we receive. A minority of academic appeals are challenges to the academic judgment of the examiners. We cannot determine whether the mark awarded to a piece of assessed work is appropriate, but we can consider whether a fair marking process was followed and we can consider whether any feedback the student received was consistent with the published information about the learning outcomes or mark scheme. As in previous years, the majority of academic appeals relate to personal circumstances students have been affected by, which they believe have impacted on their learning and performance in assessments.

There has been a small rise in the overall proportion of complaints that relate to Service issues, from 30% in 2024 to 33% in 2025. The significant financial challenges facing the higher education sector have led to many providers making changes to their staffing levels, the structure of their teaching and assessments, or the courses that they offer. The data does not unequivocally demonstrate that such changes are responsible for the rise in complaints about Service issues. We have not seen a significant rise in the number of complaints about inadequate access to academic staff or academic expertise, about delays in feedback, or about insufficient resources for large cohorts. Students do complain about these issues, but we do not expect students themselves to identify the reasons causing any failure to deliver a service as promised. We will continue to monitor complaints for indicators of the impact of providers’ financial situations.

As public awareness of the long-term impact of student loan debt grows, students and their families are more concerned about getting the maximum benefit from their time in higher education. Our conversations with students and student representative bodies tell us that students find it difficult to know what they should reasonably expect. Students can also find it hard to identify the appropriate moment to raise a concern, often giving providers the benefit of the doubt and hope that an issue will resolve itself positively without the need for formal action. Sometimes this means that providers are unaware that a problem exists. Therefore, it is essential that providers ensure accessible routes for students to raise concerns before they escalate into big problems.

Most complaints are raised by individual students but where students share a common cause for concern they can complain as a group. In 2025, we received 17 group complaints, from a total of just over 200 students. None of the groups were large enough to trigger the use of our large group complaints process. Almost every group complaint fell within the Service issues category.

Complaints closed

Complaints closed by outcome

In terms of outcomes the overall picture is broadly similar to 2024. 20% of students received a favourable outcome, either because their complaint was upheld in full or in part or Settled.

In a further 7% of cases, the provider made an offer to the student, which we record as “Not Justified (Reasonable Offer Made)”. This outcome reflects our view that the student had raised a complaint that had some merit, and the provider had offered a remedy, either before the complaint came to us or during our review, that we considered to be a fair outcome. In these cases, the provider’s offer has remained open until the end of our review. Some involved remaking offers of financial compensation amounts to students ranging from £100 to £8,250 as well as partial tuition fee refunds. In other cases, the offer included practical actions, including remarking work or reconsidering a student’s academic profile.

Settlements have fallen slightly from 15% in 2024 to 13% in 2025. We have also seen a reduction in the value of financial settlements offered by providers to settle complaints. This may in part reflect financial constraints and a more cautious approach to making offers, or it is also possible that the issues that have occurred may have had less impact on the student. Not all resolutions are financial. In many cases practical steps to correct an error, or giving a more detailed explanation can successfully resolve a complaint.

The reduction in settlements has not been accompanied by an increase in Justified or Partly Justified outcomes. The proportion of complaints we uphold, in full or in part, remains stable. Taken together, this suggests that whilst providers may be more restrained in offering financial settlements, there is no evidence of a decline in the overall quality of decision-making during a providers’ internal procedures.
Early resolution remains an important focus for us. Continuing through a full review places resource demands on both providers and students. We try to identify opportunities for resolution as soon as a complaint is received, including being clear to students when their complaint is not well founded or the outcome they are seeking is unrealistic.

The proportion of complaints that were Not Eligible for review has increased from 16% in 2024 to 20% in 2025. Of these, 70% were brought to us too early, because the student had not completed the provider’s internal procedures. Although some students approach us before engaging with their provider’s internal procedures, most of the complaints raised with us prematurely are brought by students who have begun the process but feel that they have waited too long for a decision. Delays are a symptom of a system under strain and may be one impact of the financial challenges facing providers. The level of Not Eligible complaints is now comparable to the levels we saw between 2020 and 2022, when providers were most impacted by the Covid 19 pandemic.

The distribution of complaint outcomes varies by complaint categories. Not Justified decisions remain more common in academic appeals (68%) and academic disciplinary (61%) complaints, consistent with previous years. Although individual students’ circumstances differ, providers often have well established principles and processes to follow that result in decisions that are fair.

We hear from our engagement with the sector that grappling with generative AI challenges remains a focus for many providers, but it has not been an area of rapid growth within our casework.

Complaints relating to service issues continues to present a different profile. Where academic appeals often follow a common pattern, the breadth of issues that a student may raise as a complaint means there is wide variety in the kind of evidence a provider may need to gather and evaluate. This can lead to delay in responding to a student’s concerns at the formal stage. Even where a provider has a well-resourced centralised complaints team, delays can arise when gathering information from the department where the issue first arose.

When making difficult decisions about allocation of resources, it is important that providers continue to take account of the capacity that is needed at a local level to respond to complaints. A failure to respond to complaints promptly at the earliest opportunity will result in increased demand for formal processes and in the need to compensate students for delay.