Case summary December 2024 | Not Justified
A student applied for recognition of prior learning (RPL) to make use of credits they had achieved at another provider. The student later complained to their new provider that its prospectus was misleading because the course hadn’t delivered the practical experience described. The provider rejected this complaint.
Case summary December 2024 | Not Justified
A former postgraduate student complained to their provider that their degree certificate didn’t include a classification. The provider didn’t uphold their complaint. The student had successfully applied for Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) and had therefore only completed their 60-credit dissertation at the provider.
Case summary December 2024 | Settled
A student was studying for a professionally regulated course. During their second year the professional, statutory and regulatory body (PSRB) withdrew its accreditation because it had concerns about the standard of the course and the course was closed. Arrangements were made to transfer students to a different provider, which would require them to extend their studies. The original course provider developed transfer support and compensation packages for students.
Case summary December 2024 | Not Justified
An undergraduate student began their studies at provider A. They transferred to a course awarded by provider B and delivered by provider C at the end of their first year. The student wanted to transfer onto the second year of the course (level 5), but when they arrived they were initially enrolled on the first year of the course (level 4). After a few weeks the student was allowed to move onto level 5, but they had missed some level 5 teaching.
Case summary December 2024 | Partly Justified
A disabled student was studying a foundation year at provider A. Provider A had a partnership with provider B that allowed students studying the foundation year to apply to transfer directly into a degree programme offered by provider B. The student’s agreed reasonable adjustments weren’t properly put in place for their second semester exams, so the student was offered the opportunity to re-sit the exams as a first attempt during the summer re-sit period.
Case summary December 2024 | Not Justified
A first-year undergraduate student complained to their provider that their request to transfer to a different course had been unfairly rejected. The student explained in their complaint that they’d experienced a difficult few years, which had impacted their studies. They said they had needed to apply for an additional year of funding to be able to continue with their studies and this was therefore their last chance to be able to complete a degree.
Case summary December 2024 | Not Justified
A student was initially studying at delivery provider A for an award issued by provider B. Students were given advance notice by provider B that its partnership with provider A would be ending and it would be entering into a new partnership with delivery provider C.
Case summary October 2024 | Settled
A small group of postgraduate students complained to their provider after discovering that their course was no longer externally accredited by a professional body. They said the information they’d been given prior to enrolment led them to believe the course was still accredited and explained that accreditation was a key factor in their decision to apply for the course.
Case summary October 2024 | Partly Justified
A student complained to their provider that their course wasn’t good value for money. They said the library resources were insufficient, that online services were poor, and that there had been delays in receiving feedback and approval for their dissertation proposal.
Case summary October 2024 | Not Justified
A group of paramedic students complained to their provider that they hadn’t received the clinical practice placement experience they’d expected.
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.
