Has pearson breached my rights under the 2010 Equality act?

Hi,
I sat the LNAT recently (run by pearson VUE) and, despite being eligible for 25% extra time, I chose not to because of what the LNAT website states about it:
"The LNAT universities to which you have applied will be informed of your examination access arrangements and will be able to take these into consideration when evaluating your LNAT result."
I didn't want my result to be unfairly placed downwards, and funnily enough, I didn't do too well.
I'm wondering if they have breached the eqaulity act by informing universities of my disability (which, in the case of A levels, is rightly hidden from the universities), which only serves to discriminate candidates - and if so who should I complain to?
Thanks

Informing unis of any disability is meant to be on the ucas form as well as part of your access arrangements for the lnat. I don't think you have grounds to do anything about this as whether or not the unis know because of the lnat - they will still know from your application, which makes your point mute.

Is there a typo in this, as what you're saying seems a bit jumbled/conflicting...

I agree, the first post seems to be missing the bit where the OP has found out that Pearson has notified his choices somehow.

The way I read it, OP's issue was the fact that Pearson stated that they would make universities aware that he'd/she'd been allowed extra time, meaning he/she felt "forced" to undertake the LNAT under standard conditions, for fear of his score being devalued in the eyes of universities if they knew about the 25% extra time.

OP clearly feels that any examination arrangements should be kept confidential. The thought had never occurred to me until now, but I think I agree.

The way I read it, OP's issue was the fact that Pearson stated that they would make universities aware that he'd/she'd been allowed extra time, meaning he/she felt "forced" to undertake the LNAT under standard conditions, for fear of his score being devalued in the eyes of universities if they knew about the 25% extra time.

OP clearly feels that any examination arrangements should be kept confidential. The thought had never occurred to me until now, but I think I agree.

Oh I see... That's not how I read what the OP said but if that's what they meant, that makes more sense than how I read it (though there's still no point trying to start a lawsuit against Pearson, they're highly unlikely to win )

As for whether I agree or not with exam arrangements being confidential: I doubt Pearson would pass on that info in bad faith, and would only be doing it to contextualise an applicant's LNAT. Personally, as a disabled student myself, I think it's important to be open about these things to get and take the adjustments that you need - especially if identical adjustments might be required during uni exams/assessments. But I do appreciate that it's much easier for me to say that, and harder for much-younger people to have faith/understand that they aren't likely to be directly discriminated against

Okay, if that has happened, (and again I don’t think the OP is clear although I can see it’s been edited), I see how that could introduce the possibility of bias.

In my experience processing external results like this, one bod at the Uni receives them and cleans the data up. This then gets passed on to processing people with instructions on what to do, (“everyone with this score gets an offer / a reduced offer / a rejection” etc). So ultimately the person making offers/amendments would never find out about extra time allocations or anything like that.

And if the person responsible for the data at the Uni was audited and found to be doing something different with extra time candidates then they’d likely get dismissed.

It may be of concern that this got passed on, but I struggle to see a scenario where it could make any difference to the application outcome.

What do you mean when you say, "would only be doing it to contextualise an applicant's LNAT"? Does that mean the same thing as the LNAT Consortium say on their web site, that "universities ... will be able to take these into consideration when evaluating your LNAT result"?

I don't see how "contextualise" or "take these into consideration" can mean anything other than, "Your LNAT result won't be taken at face value, given the advantage that your exam arrangements will have provided."

If all LNAT results will be considered equally, then why inform universities about exam arrangements in the first place? And then why specifically make the point that this information can be used "when evaluating your LNAT result"?

If anything universities are more likely to be more flexible to candidates who had extra time. Both you and the OP are assuming universities would use this to discriminate AGAINST the OP when in fact they’re more likely to use it as a way to make a reasonable adjustment to their selection process to the OPs advantage.

One final point regarding your "In my experience processing external results like this..." comment. Would the process you describe, also apply to - for example - A level results? Do those count as "external results"? I'm thinking of the same scenario where Candidate 1 gets AAA but Candidate 2 get A*AA with 25% extra time. Would the person reviewing these two applications (a) be aware of the 25% extra time, and (b) take that into account when comparing these two candidates?

If anything universities are more likely to be more flexible to candidates who had extra time. Both you and the OP are assuming universities would use this to discriminate AGAINST the OP when in fact they’re more likely to use it as a way to make a reasonable adjustment to their selection process to the OPs advantage.

What do you mean when you say, "would only be doing it to contextualise an applicant's LNAT"? Does that mean the same thing as the LNAT Consortium say on their web site, that "universities ... will be able to take these into consideration when evaluating your LNAT result"?

I don't see how "contextualise" or "take these into consideration" can mean anything other than, "Your LNAT result won't be taken at face value, given the advantage that your exam arrangements will have provided."

If all LNAT results will be considered equally, then why inform universities about exam arrangements in the first place? And then why specifically make the point that this information can be used "when evaluating your LNAT result"?

Hi,
I sat the LNAT recently (run by pearson VUE) and, despite being eligible for 25% extra time, I chose not to because of what the LNAT website states about it:
"The LNAT universities to which you have applied will be informed of your examination access arrangements and will be able to take these into consideration when evaluating your LNAT result."
I didn't want my result to be unfairly placed downwards, and funnily enough, I didn't do too well.
I'm wondering if they have breached the eqaulity act by informing universities of my disability (which, in the case of A levels, is rightly hidden from the universities), which only serves to discriminate candidates - and if so who should I complain to?
Thanks