Student sues Anglia Ruskin over "Mickey Mouse" degree Watch

Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#101
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#101
(Original post by That Bearded Man)
Could be the case if they comment on future employability. Or to say "world leading"
Most of their key claims are on their About page.
https://www.anglia.ac.uk/about-us/why-aru

I imagine they've had all of those pretty carefully checked and whilst one feels inclined to doubt their 'global university' claim (what does it mean anyway - being one of 350 listed on QS?), they are probably hard to challenge.
0
quote
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#102
Report 8 months ago
#102
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
I'm not sure it's true that she needs testimonial from other students - I don't have legal training, but I would think the crux of the matter is misrepresentation, eg, did the college mislead her as a student when she signed up. This case doesn't seem (afaict) to be like the previous Oxford one, which swung on poor delivery of the course.
The other students are relevent though, if it said increased job proospects and the majority of them have good jobs and she doesn’t, then she’s the exception. Just because it hasn’t happened to her doesn’t make the claim or advertising untrue.
0
quote
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#103
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#103
(Original post by Andrew97)
The other students are relevent though, if it said increased job proospects and the majority of them have good jobs and she doesn’t, then she’s the exception. Just because it hasn’t happened to her doesn’t make the claim or advertising untrue.
I assumed witness statements would be about course quality, not post-graduation employment. As Doonesbury is pointing out, that is fairly well documented in the stats according to accepted current standards.
1
quote
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#104
Report 8 months ago
#104
(Original post by Doonesbury)
HESA has adopted SOC2010 for role definitions. That's the ONS standard, nothing to do with education.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/methodology/c...ionsoc/soc2010

The horse is dead, please stop flogging it.
Alright, I will stop.
0
quote
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#105
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#105
(Original post by Andrew97)
The other students are relevent though, if it said increased job proospects and the majority of them have good jobs and she doesn’t, then she’s the exception. Just because it hasn’t happened to her doesn’t make the claim or advertising untrue.
I suppose if she could show a pattern of employment fundamentally different to the university's claims, then yes.
0
quote
reply
Andrew97
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#106
Report 8 months ago
#106
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
I suppose if she could show a pattern of employment fundamentally different to the university's claims, then yes.
Hmm, but again we don’t know the full information. She could have had job interviews that otherwise she couldn’t have got without the degree, but flunked them. Not the unis fault.
0
quote
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#107
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#107
(Original post by Andrew97)
Hmm, but again we don’t know the full information. She could have had job interviews that otherwise she couldn’t have got without the degree, but flunked them. Not the unis fault.
Yes, I was talking there about identifying a pattern of poor post-graduation employment affecting a number of ARU students, such that it would show that it wasn't just an individual set of experiences that she had. It would probably be difficult to get that, but if she did obtain such statements, I would think that alone would make quite a difference to her case, since it would point to widespread dissatisfaction, which itself would contradict ARU claims. All speculation, however.
0
quote
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#108
Report 8 months ago
#108
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
I imagine it will be very difficult for her to win it (not sure though, I'm not a lawyer - I expect nulli tertius will be able to assist us), but I would personally like to see a case like this succeed, as I don't believe that many university course offerings are either worth the money or correctly described. I also think universities are charging far too much in many cases and that far too much of that money is being spent on overpaid top managers and their expenses.
It is clear from the article that she is bringing the claim as a litigant in person, and not a well focused one.

She has brought a complaint to the Independent Adjudicator's Office. From the language used, I think she has won, but nor accepted, a trivial victory. She has lost an ICO complaint. She has had a costs order made against her at a directions hearing in the present court proceedings.

She has made life difficult for herself by alleging fraudulent misrepresentation; proving lying in circumstances where negligent misrepresentation would be sufficient win a claim.

The principal difficulty with her claim seems to be an inability to identify clear representations of fact of which the university are in breach.
3
quote
reply
kulchur
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#109
Report 8 months ago
#109
Haven't been keeping up with the specific debate on this thread, but if anyone wants to kill some time, here's the recently published judgement of the guy who tried to sue Oxford on the basis that the "bad" teaching he received led to his later "failures" in life (and unsurprisingly, lost): https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-cont...l-judgment.pdf

A really interesting example of just how difficult it is to establish causality b/w a degree and later attainment - or lack thereof - in the legal system.
1
quote
reply
chazwomaq
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#110
Report 8 months ago
#110
(Original post by Drewski)
Who are the idiot lawyers taking people like this seriously?
They probably read "Law Studies" at Anglia polytechnic.
2
quote
reply
Fullofsurprises
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#111
Report Thread starter 8 months ago
#111
(Original post by nulli tertius)
It is clear from the article that she is bringing the claim as a litigant in person, and not a well focused one.

She has brought a complaint to the Independent Adjudicator's Office. From the language used, I think she has won, but nor accepted, a trivial victory. She has lost an ICO complaint. She has had a costs order made against her at a directions hearing in the present court proceedings.

She has made life difficult for herself by alleging fraudulent misrepresentation; proving lying in circumstances where negligent misrepresentation would be sufficient win a claim.

The principal difficulty with her claim seems to be an inability to identify clear representations of fact of which the university are in breach.
She may have done better following TSR and seeking the advice of Nulli Tertius before acting.
0
quote
reply
JohanGRK
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#112
Report 8 months ago
#112
(Original post by kulchur)
Haven't been keeping up with the specific debate on this thread, but if anyone wants to kill some time, here's the recently published judgement of the guy who tried to sue Oxford on the basis that the "bad" teaching he received led to his later "failures" in life (and unsurprisingly, lost): https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-cont...l-judgment.pdf

A really interesting example of just how difficult it is to establish causality b/w a degree and later attainment - or lack thereof - in the legal system.
Thanks for this I didn't want to have to go through Legal Cheek (blurgh) to find it.
0
quote
reply
username2752874
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#113
Report 8 months ago
#113
(Original post by Wired_1800)
To your points, that is fair. However to the point of further studies, isn’t that more money to waste?
Waste is subjective; it will end up teaching the student more, and vastly increases their chances of a job if the course is high quality.
0
quote
reply
Wired_1800
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#114
Report 8 months ago
#114
(Original post by Kyber Ninja)
Waste is subjective; it will end up teaching the student more, and vastly increases their chances of a job if the course is high quality.
The key word is “if”. Most students would probably assume that their course is high quality. At least that was what the university wrote and told them. Very few students will enrol at University X just for laughs.
0
quote
reply
ARUCourseEnquiries
  •  Official Rep
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#115
Report 8 months ago
#115
We are well aware of the claims made by this former student and we are robustly defending the current litigation.

Her complaints have been through the full Office of the Independent Adjudicator process (http://www.oiahe.org.uk/). She then made a complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office (https://ico.org.uk) which was rejected after a thorough investigation. Subsequently she has launched legal action against us and has been required to pay our costs at an earlier hearing.

As this case is before the court we will not be saying anything further at this stage.
1
quote
reply
Doonesbury
  • Section Leader
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#116
Report 8 months ago
#116
(Original post by Official ARU Admissions Representative)
As this case is before the court we will not be saying anything further at this stage.
Probably wise...

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
quote
reply
nulli tertius
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#117
Report 8 months ago
#117
(Original post by Official ARU Admissions Representative)

She then made a complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office (https://ico.org.uk) which was rejected after a thorough investigation.
That is not accurate though is it?

The Information Commissioner's findings included:

"82 The Commissioner notes that the University failed to respond to the complainant’s request of 30 August 2017 within 20 working days. The University also provided additional information falling within sections 4 and 6 of the request to the complainant in its internal review on 17 January 2017, and in relation to Part 4 on 13 February 2017, outside 20 working days. As such the Commissioner finds the University to be in breach of section 10 of the FOIA, which states that a public authority must comply with section 1(1) within 20 working days of receipt of the request.

83. The Commissioner further finds the University to be in breach of section 10 of the FOIA in respect of the clarified request dated 11 October 2016, in that it provided the complainant with information within the scope of the request outside 20 working days of receipt of the clarified request (in its internal review of 17 January 2017)."

Here are the full findings of the Information Commissioner

https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve...fs50649446.pdf

You say "Her complaints have been through the full Office of the Independent Adjudicator process". You do not say whether or not any of her complaints to the Independent Adjudicator were upheld. Were they?
2
quote
reply
bones-mccoy
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#118
Report 8 months ago
#118
It's not a universities job to secure you a job immediately after you graduate, that's completely down to the student

Sounds like this idiot needs to enter the real world
0
quote
reply
shadowdweller
  • TSR Support Team
  • Peer Support Volunteers
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#119
Report 8 months ago
#119
The timing on cases like these always seems very suspect - it would be one thing if she'd done it during or immediately after completing her course, but when it's some years after, it seems more as if she's just looking for something else to blame.
0
quote
reply
hannah00
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#120
Report 8 months ago
#120
The govt knows most of these universities have 0 value to society or the economy.

At this point it is just a keynesian stimulus to improve the employment statistics. All those lecturers, admin staff and students with very high marginal propensity to consume creating jobs in nightclubs, fast food places etc

Add in a few hundred international students and it also helps finance the current account deficit.
1
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you like exams?

Yes (151)
18.13%
No (507)
60.86%
Not really bothered about them (175)
21.01%

Watched Threads

View All