Case Summaries

They returned to their provider the following year and the provider put in place some support for the student. There were some delays to the student’s student loan funding and DSA funding because of confusion about the interruption to their studies and this caused the student hardship and additional distress. The student withdrew from their studies following a mental health crisis.

The student complained to the provider about the support they had received when they had returned to study after interrupting. The provider upheld the student’s complaint. Although the provider had put in place pastoral and financial support for the student, it accepted that the student had found it very distressing to have to tell different people in different services about their history because of the provider’s concerns about confidentiality. The provider had taken steps to improve how it shares information about a student’s support needs as a result of the complaint. The provider also accepted that it could have given clearer information and advice to the student about what interrupting their studies might mean for their student funding, and this might have avoided the difficulties the student had with accessing financial support when they returned. The provider offered to refund the student’s tuition fees and repay their maintenance loan, and to pay them compensation of £3,500 for distress and inconvenience, because they weren’t able to continue with their studies.

The student rejected the provider’s offer and complained to us. They asked for compensation for lost earnings that they would have earned had they taken an apprenticeship instead of registering at the provider.

We decided that the provider had offered the student a reasonable remedy for the issues they had experienced and had also taken action to improve support provision for future students. The student had very difficult personal circumstances, and the provider had given the student some support. We decided that it was reasonable for the provider not to compensate the student for earnings they might have received if they had decided to do an apprenticeship instead. The provider’s offer was still open and so we decided that the student’s complaint to us was Not Justified on that basis.