As the independent student complaints ombuds serving the higher education sector, the OIA sits in a unique position. We review complaints across England and Wales and we recognise that because of this specific status, having the trust and confidence of students, universities, SCITTs, colleges, and other providers, is vital to how we operate.
That is why we are consulting openly on our plan to change the Scheme we use to decide complaints. There is little time left before our consultation ends on 31 July, so please do share your views.
We know we are asking the sector to engage with more than a set of procedural changes. We are inviting a conversation about how a students’ complaints scheme works in an evolving system.
Some of the discussion we have seen so far in this consultation has focused on individual proposals. Other views have looked more fundamentally at the move from a detailed rules-based Scheme to one founded on principles. Both conversations are important. To assist those who have yet to complete our consultation, here is our thinking on two key points.
Moving to a principles-based approach
Firstly, one assumption that occasionally emerges in discussions about principles-based frameworks is that they somehow provide less certainty than detailed procedural rules. Rules are specific. They suggest every circumstance has been anticipated and every answer prescribed.
The reality of complaint resolution is that no two complaints are precisely alike. Independent review has always required judgement. Our expertise lies in assessing evidence, context, proportionality, and applying established standards. Explaining reasoning and treating cases consistently, whilst recognising that fairness sometimes requires consideration of individual circumstances, will always be a key part of our approach.
Consistency does not come from ever more detailed rules. It comes from applying clear principles, explaining decisions carefully, and testing reasoning against previous cases and established approaches. That is the role of an Ombuds scheme like ours. All our process and further guidance will be designed to ensure our work delivers on the principles set out in our new Scheme.
Decisions are reached through disciplined consideration of evidence against a framework of established principles. That is important because students and providers alike should have confidence that outcomes are determined by the merits of the complaint rather than outcomes defined by what ‘rules’ may, or may not, say. The shift in presentation of the Scheme is intended to make the framework that we currently work with clearer, rather than to reduce our service for either students or providers.
Reduced time limit for complaints
Secondly, we propose to reduce the time limit for bringing complaints to the OIA from twelve months to six months after the completion of internal procedures. Historically, we used to operate a three month window (before moving to 12 months). We propose that a six month window is most likely to lead to effective and meaningful resolution for students. Experience tells us that complaints brought sooner create better opportunities for redress and resolution.
For complaints that reach us sooner, a wider range of practical remedies are available. We also know that evidence is generally more accessible and reliable closer to the events in question which enables us to make practical recommendations which have real impact and drive improvements.
Quicker resolution means that students spend less time living with uncertainty. Knowing that complaints are stressful and invariably the result of something that has been perceived to have gone wrong, encouraging students to contact us sooner has the potential to reduce that burden.
This change, perhaps more than others, demonstrates the benefits of a principles-led approach. Where a complaint has had a particularly difficult journey we can flex our approach. The current rules-based system has the unintended consequence of providing ‘cliff edge’ moments where discretion, and ability to respond, are curtailed.
Changing our definition of a student
The proposed Scheme would apply once an applicant accepts an offer and enters into a contractual relationship with the provider(s).
Important decisions affecting students occur before registration. Students commit financially, arrange accommodation, relocate, organise visas, leave employment, and make caring arrangements long before they set foot in Freshers’ Week. Changes to course content, facilities, delivery methods, or other aspects of the educational experience can also arise during this period.
Our proposal does not alter a longstanding point that admissions decisions in relation to academic judgement remain outside our remit.
An evolving Scheme to meet the needs of students today
Underlying these proposals is a broader ambition: our Scheme should be accessible to everyone. This includes experienced complaints practitioners, advisers, and legal teams, but also students who may engage with the process only once, and often during a difficult time.
Good ombuds schemes evolve because the sectors they serve evolve. Higher education and students today are different from when our current Scheme was introduced. The complaints we receive reflect greater complexity across regulation, consumer protection, and educational delivery. They also reflect a more difficult and complex environment for many students to navigate. We need the ability to respond to this.
Our Scheme is evolving with an ever changing sector, while remaining rooted in our founding principles: independence, fairness, accessibility, and proportionality.
Please do take the time to engage with our consultation before 31 July.