Give us a truly fair and impartial student complaints system!

Nope, don't identify with Ruth Deech and only signed up to this forum to specifically respond to your post

On the sign up page I was originally going to use douche or some variant of that since it's a word I say quite often, so from there I kind of went oh of course...deech.

I was involved in the first case quite a few years ago. A PhD student who was bullied and withdrawn, so I supported her through all the procedures. We were naive and believed at each stage that it would be a fair process, and that the vile disgusting people involved in prior stages would all be disciplined. None of that happened. You can guess the way they treated me in response. It was laughable when we were supporting each other, but once I was on my own it was pretty rough.

A few years later, I got to know another PhD student. She was bullied and withdrawn too, but this time I had a better mindset of not trusting any of them to act fairly. So we focused not just on her case, but the moment they started to "investigate" her complaint we were all over them asking questions in writing and pointing out the flaws about every little move they tried to pull, basically preparing the groundwork for a case we knew was going to judicial review. Right now her case is with the OIA, and then it's off to court where I will be representing her.

There has been one initial hearing, where the university tried to argue that we are not allowed to take them to court, the correct remedy is through the OIA blah blah blah. I showed up to court with pretty much the same case law I've explained in here. The judge read it, and basically said yeah you're right. The barrister looked stupid and clueless that day.

Sounds pretty excellent to me! I wish you all the very best with your new case, and please do keep us informed about what is going on with it! I'll be very pleased if you win! Good luck!

Yes it's likely they will, as you had to follow the OIA, but it has to be in three months of the OIA and preferably sooner. Before filing a claim you need to follow something called the pre-action protocol. Look them up on the MOJ website, there will be one for judicial review and for civil claims.

It involves writing to the university setting out your claim, and giveng them 14 days to respond to it or concede it. You MUST do this first. Only when it fails do you file your claim in court.

As I take it you lost the case with OIA, the judge will place a lot of weight on that. You need to be VERY sure of your claim being able explain and get around why you lost at the OIA.

I would suggest you read this whole thread. Then think carefully about the way to write the pre-action letter... You don't want to leave the university with any arguable defence of their decision

On the legal stuff:


Affordable alternatives?

Court fees are not crazy, in the order of a few hundred quid whether you take the university to the High Court for judicial review or if you sue them in the County Courts.

I'd forget solicitors and barristers. There are very few with sufficient knowledge of higher education law, and the hours it would take to prepare your case would cost more than anything you'd hope to recover anyway.
Matin v UCL and Crawford v Newcastle University both issued and stayed judicial review proceedings against the university. Or even if you don't figure out what you're doing until it is too late, you will likely be within time for a claim in contract. For Judicial Review you can apply for an extension of time saying you were obliged to complete the OIA procedures first.

So far the court has never held that the OIA decision means you can't follow up with a legal case. The most recent case Crawford, the judge said this...

I have considerable doubt, however, whether the fact that the Claimant had pursued a complaint to the OIA would bar the Claimant from relief if he had made good his argument under "issue 1" on the construction and application of the MBBS Stage 5 Handbook.

Maxwell, I accept, was a different kind of case where the individual had an entitlement to make a claim before the County Court for disability discrimination. Perhaps it went no further than recognising that the County Court retained jurisdiction after the OIA decision. So, of course, does this Court in its judicial review jurisdiction.

I find it difficult, however, to contemplate that the 'alternative' procedure of the OIA (once completed) could be considered, whatever the OIA's expertise in educational matters, as providing the only remedy on the issue of legality raised by "issue 1" in this case. The argument that judicial review is a remedy of 'last resort' which is at the heart of the 'effective alternative remedy' point may not, in itself, justify the refusal of relief when, as here, the alternative remedy has been pursued albeit unsuccessful. That has, as I have made clear in relation to "issue 2", some bearing on how discretion should or should not be exercised in granting a remedy for the unfairness in the procedure followed by the Appeal Adjudicator. But, in that its relevance lies in the substance of the individual's complaint and how it was dealt with by the OIA rather than simply by a bald reliance on the fact that another 'alternative' procedure has been followed. I recognise, however, the broad thrust of Mitting J's comments in Peng Hu Shi may point in a different direction. Having expressed that view, as it is not necessary to reach a concluded view in this case, I prefer not to.


The courts are not stupid, they don't want to place universities above the law despite what the Higher Education Act says.

Can't you be stuck with the other side's costs, though - which would mean a big expense? What about free legal advice from any insurance you have?

I didn't know you could start a case then stay it.

I don't have experience of university complaints systems but I do know they will not be designed to provide justice but to avoid the universities having the expense of being taken to court. At the same time they have to give an appearance of offering justice to avoid too much pressure for change. Any supposedly "impartial" service would probably recruit people with experience of the university system so would not remain impartial.

Perhaps what students should press for is for student unions to provide legal insurance for students against these issues for a small fee and have a list of legal advisers who can provide good legal advice when it is needed. I can't call up the endsleigh policy to see if it does but legal cover for "employment" is part of at least one other student policy, perhaps that would cover educational issues as they impact on employment.

OK, but what if a (former) higher education student cannot afford to take the case to court, or (s)he does not have any contacts able and willing to provide legal support either as mate's rates for a legal service consulted or simply to back up their friend/client?

What chance/probability would you say that a student has then or bringing an appeal to the OIA and having it found (partially) justified WITH proportionate action occurring to both ensure that the university does not act above and in contempt of the law and breaching human rights etc ever again: thus holding the institution to account for its actions, handling of their own procedures (or lack of them in some cases), and in the mandatory support that they should afford and indeed have a duty to provide to all students regardless of whether or not they are hindered with physical or mental health illnesses and disabilities; as well as addressing the damages caused to the individual (ex-)student who brought forward the appeal to the OIA in the 1st place?

What is the most effective route to ensure that (social, if not strictly/officially "judicial", justice) is practiced in handling the case and then executed/implemented as a result of (only having the option of) bringing the case to the OIA/expressing your complaints to some Body?

What can students who are already highly distressed by the nature of their complaint, then working their way through first the university's internal complaints system, then through the long drawn-out OIA appeals complaint process, with no support and no-one to turn to for truly independent advice without being out-priced, becoming embroiled within convoluted legal policies/proceedings and (red tape) bureaucracy to actually get anywhere, and without completely losing the will to live/giving up on life?

I have a solicitor acting on my behalf. He says the OIA is an absolute waste of time. It takes years to go through. I am unsure what to think now as it seems I might be thrown out of court if I haven't exhausted all avenues!! Please could someone advice me what they think . Aswell as a number of issues it has come to light through the appeals process that my ILP was never implemented "I am dyslexic". therefor despite having asked about this numerous times through my degree and being told the University "don't offer any support with dyslexia" I find that the are actually legally bound to support Dyslexic students. What should I do guys??????

Taking years to go through is not a legally solid reason to skip the OIA! But if your case involves disability discrimination you shouldn't get thrown out of court. Is your solicitor going for Judicial Review or suing them in the County Court for discrimination? If it's the county court there is no basis for it to get thrown out for the OIA. If it's judicial review, then as long as the claim is one which involves discrimination it means you can also skip the OIA.

Maxwell v OIA confirms that the OIA can't make legal findings about discrimination or indeed any other legal issues.

Kwao v University of Keele confirms you can skip the OIA as long as Maxwell applies.

So discrimination makes it easy to skip the OIA. Any other tort like negligence or breach of contract makes would still make it possible to skip the OIA but you need to do a bit more work to prove it.

What you should do is read this entire thread, get a really good grip of your legal position in terms of what the court will allow/not allow, and then make sure your solicitor doesn't write anything or head down a path which will screw you over.

Oh Deech thank you so much for replying. I have got so stressed with it all, it is a lot more complicated than my sto do it in 3 months. If you don't, the court can view it as you trying to get around the time-limit by using the 6 year path. That is an abuse of the court's processeshort question but the long and short is I was completely stitched by Uni's internal procedure they have just ignored all evidence told lies and said goodbye. I went to see a solicitor and when I said I was dyslexic he said well did they give you support, I said no they had refused any support and he said they cannot do that. I see a Barrister on Monday. The stress is unbelievable. They are a law unto themselves and seem to just be able to get away with it. I was told I could go to the OIA but why would I want to when they are in the Universities pockets and don't really look into things just rule on Universities procedure. It is all a sham!!! I only want to be able to resit my Dissertation with a new supervisor as she had told me a lot of rubbish the first times I have the proof. I don't mind going to court but it is ultimately not what I want.