Taking your complaint to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA)
The OIA is a free, independent service that investigates and tries to resolve complaints about universities from
current and former students.
You’re likely to learn about the OIA if you have appealed or complained to the University and the complaint has
reached the end of university processes. At this point, the University gives or offers a Completion of
Procedures (COP) letter. This means you’ve taken your case as far as possible within the University.
If you’re still not satisfied, the COP letter allows you to take your case to the OIA within one year of the
letter date. However, it’s best not to wait too long as delays can make investigations harder.
The OIA will check whether the University has followed its own rules and acted reasonably.
They won’t consider:
- The University’s academic judgement ( how markers decide the quality of your work.)
- Cases without a COP letter, unless the complaint is about a delay in providing a COP or about the University
refusing to give you one
- Complaints about the admission process (though they will consider the support your University provided
during the admission process)
If you are not sure whether taking your case to the OIA will help, it might be useful to look at their library of case studies which includes details about cases like yours and what
the outcome was.
Some examples from the OIA’s case studies are:
Link to full case study.
Case Summary May 2024 | Settled
A student submitted their assignment online, four minutes after the submission deadline.
The work was marked and the student was told the provisional mark was 58%. The provider then
lowered the mark to the pass mark because it was a late submission. The student submitted an
appeal asking for their personal circumstances to be taken into account. The student described
experiencing anxiety and panic attacks following an incident in their student accommodation. The
work was due on the first anniversary of the death of a close family member. The student had
felt so overwhelmed that they took a short time away from their studies but this meant their
work piled up. The student said that they were so anxious that they were unable to articulate
their concerns to their tutor, and had not been able to get a medical appointment. They had
experienced a panic attack when trying to submit the work.
The provider rejected the student’s appeal because they did not supply any independent evidence
about their mental health at the time of the submission.
The student complained… and was able to supply new medical evidence. In the light of this
evidence, and considering what was proportionate in the circumstances of this case, the provider
agreed to remove the penalty it had applied for late submission. The student accepted this offer
and the complaint was Settled.
Link to full case study.
Case Summary February 2023 | Not Justified
A final-year undergraduate student was suspected of plagiarism in an essay and asked to attend a
disciplinary panel hearing.
The student admitted plagiarism during the hearing. They said that they had recently experienced
mental health difficulties and a bereavement, which had made it hard for them to properly engage
with their studies. The panel decided to apply a less serious penalty than it would usually
apply in such circumstances, in view of the student’s mitigation. The student’s mark in the
affected assessment was reduced by 25% instead of by 50%.
The student appealed. The provider concluded that there were no procedural errors in its handling
of the investigation and no new evidence that would call into question its original decision.
The student complained to us that the penalty imposed was unfair in view of the difficult
circumstances they had faced.
We did not uphold the student’s complaint (we found it “Not Justified”). We decided that the
provider’s final decision was reasonable because there was evidence that it had properly
considered the student’s difficult personal circumstances when applying a lesser penalty, and
that the penalty applied was in line with its procedures.
Link to full case study.
Case Summary October 2019 | Justified
A fitness to practise panel reached a decision that a student was not fit for practice and should
not be allowed to continue on the course. The letter to the student told the student they could
appeal and directed them to the academic appeal regulations. The student appealed and the
provider rejected the appeal. The student complained to us.
We decided that the complaint was Justified on procedural grounds. The student had been directed
to the wrong appeal process. The grounds for appealing decisions about academic progress were
different to the grounds for appeal set out in the fitness to practise appeals regulations. We
concluded that the provider had not considered the appeal under the correct procedure. We were
also concerned that the appeal decision-maker did not have access to all of the relevant
information from the fitness to practise panel, including the letter which explained the
decision to the student.
We did not reach any decision about the merits of the student’s appeal. We recommended that the
provider should consider a fresh appeal submission from the student, under the correct
procedures.
You Advice Service are happy to proofread OIA complaints or represent you. You can submit a complaint to the OIA
online or download their forms in different formats here.
If you choose to be represented, you’ll need to complete certain details on the form. A lot of the information
you need will be in Your Student Union caseworker’s email signature. The OIA will communicate with your
representative if you have one, they won’t contact you.
You or your representative will get a reference number for your case, and you’ll need to use it when
communicating with the OIA about your case. If you create a case on My OIA you can track the progress of your
complaint. The OIA will keep you or your representative updated during the investigation and will try to resolve
the case informally, if they can, to speed things up. Once a decision is made, you’ll receive an outcome.
- Settled – The OIA finds a solution that satisfies both the student and the University
- Justified – Your complaint is valid
- Partly justified – Some aspects of your complaint are valid, but some are not
- Not Justified – Your complaint lacks grounds or evidence and is not upheld
The OIA usually recommends actions for the University to follow if the case is Justified or Partly Justified.
While these recommendations are not legally binding, universities usually comply
Remember, the OIA is an alternative to a legal process, not a replacement for it.
You can find more information about
the OIA here.
You can contact a Student Union Caseworker here.
If you are looking for legal advice instead, your local law centre may be able to give you free independent
advice. Find out who
that is here.