Case SummariesBack to Case Summaries
Consumer rights issues - CS082003
Case summary September 2020 | Not Justified
A student complained to their provider that the information on its website was misleading.
The student believed that they would need to study either module A or module B. However, they had to study module A and module B. When the student raised this, the provider accepted that there was an error in the information on its website and took steps to correct the information. It also offered the student £500 as a goodwill gesture.
The student complained to us. They said that they would not have started the course if they had known that they had to study both modules. They wanted a refund of their tuition fees and of their living costs.
During our review process, the provider offered to increase its payment to the student to £1,000, and to offer a further apology. We decided that this offer was reasonable and so we decided that the complaint was Not Justified. We said that it would have been better if the initial offer to the student had been made in a way which recognised that the student had been caused distress and inconvenience by the mistake on the website. But we were satisfied that the remedy was appropriate. The student had been offered the opportunity to withdraw from studies, but had decided to transfer to another course, for which the same fees were payable. The provider had supported the student to use their previous assessments towards the new course, and the student would be able to complete their new qualification within the original timescale.