We include in this section some information about patterns and trends in the complaints we see. We are always cautious in interpreting this, because the number of students who complain to us is still very small in relation to the student body as a whole and many factors can influence a student’s decision to pursue a complaint. Similarly, trying to draw wider conclusions about the sector from our data should also be approached with caution. Nonetheless, the complaints we see reflect issues that matter to students and show that some students are proportionately much more likely to complain to us than others.
Complaints received
In 2022 we received 2,850 complaints, our highest ever number and an increase of 3% on 2021 (2,763).
The rise in complaints in 2022 continues the trend of annual increases since 2017, although the increases over the last few years have been smaller than those we saw before the pandemic.
The number of students studying at providers in England is significantly larger than the number studying in Wales. The number of complaints we received as a proportion of the student body in each country is similar.
Number of complaints received per year
The overall picture of complaint volumes in the sector is complex. From our engagement with students and higher education providers, we have heard that some students are finding it more difficult with the other challenges they are facing to pursue their complaints, and that some providers are finding it difficult to progress complaints effectively through their internal procedures in the context of other pressures. However, we are also hearing of higher volumes of complaints in providers, and this is supported by the information we have from providers about the number of Completion of Procedures (COP) Letters they issued in 2022 at the end of their internal processes.
Complaints received by complaint category
In 2022, there was some rebalancing of our caseload between complaints relating to service issues (teaching, course delivery, supervision and course-related facilities) and complaints relating to academic appeals. Service issue complaints and academic appeals each accounted for 38% of complaints we received (45% and 29% respectively in 2021). This rebalancing was at least in part related to emerging from the pandemic. More of the Covid-related complaints we received in 2022 related to academic appeals and fewer to service issues than in the previous two years. Overall the number of Covid-related complaints was significantly lower in 2022, accounting for a little under a quarter of our case receipts, and reduced through the year. It is likely that the rise in complaints relating to academic appeals partly reflects the end of the “no detriment” or safety net policies that had been in place during the pandemic and had resulted in fewer appeals. However, well before the pandemic we had seen a trend of service issue complaints increasing as a proportion of our caseload and academic appeals decreasing, and the proportions have not gone back to those we saw in earlier years.
The number of complaints in other complaint categories remained relatively small. Collectively these categories accounted for 24% of case receipts, slightly lower than last year (27%).
Complaints received by area of study - Top 10
We consistently receive more complaints from students on Business and management courses, reflecting the high number of students on courses in this area. Complaint numbers by subject area can be quite variable, partly because numbers are fairly small once broken down in this way. But we have seen a notable increase over the last two years in the number of complaints from students studying Subjects allied to medicine.
Complaints received by student domicile
In 2022 there was a significant growth in the non-EU student population and we saw an increase in the proportion of complaints from these students (and a corresponding decrease in complaints from UK-domiciled students). International students, especially non-EU students, continue to be over-represented in the complaints we receive. As an indicative comparison, non-EU students accounted for 19% of the student body in England and Wales as reported in HESA statistics for 2021/22, but 27% of the complaints made to us in 2022.
Complaints received by level of study
A consistent feature of the complaints we receive is the significant over-representation of PhD and other postgraduate students. However, in 2022 this over-representation was less marked than in recent years. In 2022, 40% of complaints we received came from these students (as an indicative comparison, PhD and other postgraduate students made up 28% of the overall student population in England and Wales as reported in HESA statistics for 2021/22). We have in previous years discussed the likely reasons for the over-representation, including the often substantial personal and financial investment and the other considerations for some international postgraduate students such as visas or sponsorship arrangements, leading to a possible greater sense of pressure to “succeed” in their studies. There are also some issues that only affect postgraduate or PhD students, for example issues with the supervisory relationship are a common theme in complaints from PhD students.
Complaints closed
In 2022, we closed 2,821 complaints, an increase of 6% from 2021 (2,654). Although this was our highest ever number of closures in a year, we did not meet our key performance indicator (KPI) of closing 75% of complaints within six months of receipt, closing 69% within that timeframe. We are very aware of how important it is to students that we review their complaints in a timely way. We were able to make some progress with reducing the number of older cases in our caseload and this remains a key focus.
In addition, we closed a complaint from a group of over 400 students. We have not included this in our data on complaints closed in 2022 to avoid a distorting effect on trend information.
The outcome of complaints
In total, 25% of cases were Justified, Partly Justified, or Settled in favour of the student. This is a slight decrease on last year (27%), in part because of the reduction in complaints about service issues and the increase in complaints about academic appeals (proportionately more complaints about service issues are upheld). In addition, the complaint from the large group of students was Partly Justified. The proportion of complaints we settled in 2022 was 15%, the same as in 2021 and again exceeding our KPI. The proportion of outcomes is similar for complaints about providers in both England and Wales.
The proportion of cases that were Not Justified rose slightly in 2022. We continue to engage with students and student advisers about our approach and what we consider to be reasonable so that students can make an informed decision about whether pursuing their complaint is likely to lead to the outcome they are hoping for.
In 11% of the complaints with a Not Justified outcome, the provider had already made an offer to remedy the student’s complaint but the student had not accepted the offer. We agreed that the student had a valid complaint but decided that the provider’s offer was reasonable and it remained open for the student to accept. On that basis, we didn’t uphold the complaint.
In 2022 there was also a slight increase in the proportion of complaints that we decided were Not Eligible for us to look at under our Rules. Many of these cases were where the student had come to us before they had completed the provider’s internal processes. In some cases the student was finding it difficult to pursue their complaint with the provider, perhaps because of delays or other barriers, and we did what we could to help move the complaint forward. We continued to try to make it clear to students when they can complain to us, and to emphasise that they normally need to complete those processes first.
Legal challenges to our decisions
Our case decisions can be challenged by judicial review. During 2022 we received a total of four new judicial review claims, compared to eight in 2021. This continues the steady downward trend in the number of claims received over the last seven years, despite the rise in complaints during that period. Two of those four claims were refused permission, and one is awaiting a decision.
In one case we offered to reopen our review when the claim was served. (Under our normal processes the student could have asked us to consider reopening our review after we issued our decision but they did not.) The provider decided to reopen its consideration of the student’s disciplinary case and the judicial review claim was withdrawn.
Judicial review cases often provide useful learning and insights for us, and reflections from judges on our decisions and processes.
“The [OIA’s] decision … is a careful and considered decision taking into account the relevant rules and regulations governing both the [OIA] and the [provider]. It acknowledges the breadth of the complaint made by the Claimant but correctly notes the time limit applying to complaints made to the Defendant which the Claimant had been informed of … Finally the decision … was a reasonable decision which is carefully explained on the basis of those matters which the Defendant could look at. This did not include all events which had arisen during the Claimant’s studies.”
In June 2022 we attended the first substantive hearing of a judicial review claim against us since 2018. (The claim was issued in 2021.) The claim related to the provider’s decision to exclude a student following two incidents of racist behaviour. At the hearing the judge, the Hon. Mrs Justice Steyn DBE, found in favour of the claimant on two grounds:
- That the OIA was wrong to dismiss the complaint that the penalty of expulsion was disproportionate in any event.
- That the OIA was wrong in failing to hold that the provider was fundamentally unfair in taking into account in its decision other alleged misdemeanours of the claimant (not charged against him) although stating that it did not.
The judge did not uphold the third ground, that the OIA was wrong to dismiss the complaint that the decision of the provider was perverse and/or procedurally unfair in that the process failed properly to take into account the claimant’s disability.
The judge quashed our decision and ordered that we conduct a fresh review. She didn’t accept the claimant’s argument that the penalty was not one that the provider could have imposed, and declined to make an order that we must recommend that the provider should impose a lesser penalty, or that we should find the complaint Justified or Partly Justified without conducting the fresh review.
The judge made no order for costs against us, reflecting the fact that we had offered to reopen our review when permission was granted and the student had declined our offer.
Also during the year we received one County Court claim for damages in which the student argued that the OIA had destroyed their documents. The claim was struck out by the Court. A claim for discrimination, received in 2021, was also struck out during the year.
