Case summary April 2026 | Justified
A student enrolled to study on a Graduate Diploma in Law with a pre-sessional module attached. The student submitted their pre-sessional assessment after the standard deadline, but within the permitted late submission window. This resulted in the mark being capped at pass.
Case summary April 2026 | Not Justified
A student on a professionally regulated healthcare course needed to undergo a background check before beginning any placements. The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check revealed that the student had a criminal conviction. The student had not previously told the provider about it when they had been asked to share information about any convictions.
Case summary April 2026 | Partly Justified
Students had to submit two pieces of assessed work for a particular module. The first piece did not contribute to the overall grade students would achieve for the module. Students would receive feedback on it and the data within it could be used as the basis for the second piece of work.
Case summary April 2026 | Partly Justified
A student shared with the provider that they have autism, ADHD and generalised anxiety disorder. A support plan was put in place to ensure that the student was not placed at a disadvantage by the provider. This included a requirement for instructions to be clear and unambiguous.
Case summary April 2026 | Partly Justified
A student (student A) made an online report about bullying and sexual harassment by another student (student B). Student A and student B were living in the same student flat. At student A’s request, the provider arranged for student A to move to alternative accommodation.
Case summary April 2026 | Justified
A student (student A) made an online report to the provider describing a sexual assault by another student (student B). Three months later student A saw a caseworker to discuss the report in more detail and confirmed that they wanted the provider to take action to investigate the report.
Case summary April 2026 | Not Justified
A student reported receiving a number of hostile messages via social media and directly to their mobile phone, which they felt was bullying and harassment. It was clear from the content of the messages that they were written by someone with knowledge of the interactions between students and staff on a particular module. The messages expressed views supporting the physical harm of certain groups of people and caused the recipient significant distress.
Case summary April 2026 | Settled
Student A made a report to the provider about the conduct of student B. The two students engaged in sexual activity which both agreed was initially consensual. Student A reported that they had withdrawn consent, but that student B had not stopped the activity.
Case summary April 2026 | Settled
A provider withdrew a student because of low attendance. The student appealed the decision to withdraw them, saying that their record of attendance had been affected by a faulty access card. The provider reinstated the student on the condition that, by a certain deadline, they would attend all sessions with all attendance swipes recorded and that the student would meet with the student support team.
Public interest case November 2025 | Justified
Brit College
This case summary about Brit College illustrates the impact on individual students where there is a gap in student protection.
We publish summaries of some of the complaints that we review. We always leave out of the summary any information that might identify the student who made the complaint. In some cases we decide that it is in the public interest to publish a summary of a complaint that includes the name of the provider.
