Consumer Rights Bill

Written evidence submitted by Trevor Mayes (CR 07)

 

Students as Vulnerable Consumers.

 

Summary

1. Universities as charity companies have become more commercial to compete in a global market place; therefore trading standards and professional conduct should be put on the same footing as other professional and commercial services.

2. Student rights as consumers have failed to keep up with increased commercialisation and privatisation. The massive increase in tuition fees and predicted average debt of £53,000 has put students in a vulnerable position.

3. Universities while designated as public bodies are in fact autonomous, staff and officers are not in public office per see so cannot be charged with misconduct in public office, on the other hand regulation of company law is inadequate, regulated commercial companies would never get away with this conduct. However, privatised universities have the same regulation for standards as autonomous institutions without consumer safeguards.

4. Consumer law needs to address this situation by the designation of students that recognises their financial and welfare vulnerabilities as consumers and regulated via an independent agency separate from any academic regulation or funding.

5. The Office of the Independent adjudicator for Higher Education known as the OIA replaces the courts for student complaints. However, it is ineffective in enforcing the same degree of propriety and adherence to a course of public justice. The rules need to be enforced and complaints made without fear of retribution together with a duty of candour and personal responsibility. Compensation awards to students and requirements to improve should be made mandatory, they are currently unenforceable.

6. A University Teaching Council to act in the public interest with compulsory registration of teaching staff concerning professional conduct and to include scrutiny of ‘academic judgement’ and ‘fit person’ test.

7. Students should be fully informed with an information pack concerning the way in which universities are governed, regulated and the process of complaint.

8. An effective whistle blowing system needs to be put in place without fear of retribution, as current arrangements are inadequate. Gagging requirements under threat of legal action preventing students from repeating their experiences should be banned.

Further Details

9. The increase in tuition fees together with cuts in government funding has led to an increased globalised commercialisation of higher education institutions HEI’s as charity companies. The nature of the commercial change is a contentious issue within higher education and reflected in job titles whereby Vice Chancellors are sometimes referred to as the chief executive.

10. The BBC reported on the 12th August 2011 "Average debts may reach £53,000 for UK students starting in 2012". Terms and conditions for the payment of tuition fees should be on the same basis and any other financial transaction concerning a service and the life consequences of being liable for that amount of debt.

11. Unfortunately, student rights as consumers have failed to keep up with the need for institutions to make money. This puts students in a vulnerable position on two grounds, firstly, there is a financial vulnerability and failure of service provision and secondly, welfare vulnerability as victims of institutionalised abuse concerning position and power with regard to making a complaint. With current higher education law, regulation and culture, the only way this can be resolved is by addressing the vulnerability of students as consumers and there are two ways to help achieve this.

11.1. The enforcement of the rules, regulations, company law and a whistle blowing process with a duty of candour administered separately from any existing process via a Commission.

11.2. Issues of professional conduct and competence to be address via a University Teaching Council separate from any institutional assessment.

12. From my experiences at a Welsh university, they play it dirty beyond most people’s comprehension, rules and processes are flouted with impunity, blatant lies are told to to conceal misconduct and discredit a complainant, anonymous abusive emails sent which are obviously from staff involved. They portray people who tell the truth as being crazy and paranoid; they seem to gain some kind of gratification from inflicting as much financial and physiological damage as possible, and then take smug satisfaction that a student is powerless to do anything about it. What is worse is that this behaviour seems to be not only condoned but also concealed by regulators and government.

13. In England and Wales there are three main aspects of university regulation, Higher Education Funding Councils HEFCE and HEFCW for financial regulation, the Quality Assurance Agency QAA for standards and the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education OIA for complaints.

The Higher Education Funding Council for Wales HEFCW

14. I have pursued a complaint of financial irregularities concerning the use of public funds for legal expenses to defend the personal liability of officers and staff contrary to the Company Acts 1985 and 2006 only to be told that I have no evidence. The fact that the auditors for the University concerned refused on four occasions to carry out any investigation was ignored. The right of public complaint concerning financial irregularities to respective Audit Offices under the Local Government Act 2000 was excluded under the Public Audit Act 2004 and replaced by a ‘Letter of Understanding’ between funding councils and governments.

15. The only concession that I have received from HEFCW is a written apology for publishing an abusive and derogatory comment concerning myself to the internet. Unfortunately, this conduct seems to reflect the attitude and culture within Welsh higher education, funding councils have the power to withhold funding, in reality that is never going to happen.

The Quality Assurance Agency QAA

16. The university regulator the QAA is a registered charity and from correspondence they have confirmed they have no powers of intervention or enforcement with regard to standards. Assessments of universities may be critical but there is no legal requirement for them to improve or correct any failure of standards or management. This is in contrast to the public perception of the schools regulator OFSTED or the Welsh Estyn.

17. The QAA runs a Cause for Concern process to deal with serious issues; I have used this process to pursue a complaint without success. It came to the point that the QAA said it could not proceed, as I was the only one complaining. They clearly stated this was my fault as I had failed to find another student complaining of exactly the same thing within the period they allowed. Would this response be acceptable from the regulator of a public utility or service provider saying as you are the only one in your town who has complained and as you have failed to find someone else complaining of the same thing there is nothing we can do? A complaint to the QAA Board got nowhere and as they are a registered charity, I complained to the Charity Commission stating they were putting vulnerable students at risk by presenting a process structurally ineffective. In reply, the Charity Commission stated they have no powers to intervene on how a charity runs its affairs.

18. A report entitled Students and Universities by the House of Commons Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Eleventh Report of Session 2008-09 addressed some of these matters. The report said:

19. "...the current system for safeguarding standards is out of date, inconsistent and should be replaced. The Quality Assurance Agency should be transformed into an independent Quality and Standards Agency with a specific standards remit."

20. "There is a lack of consistency across the higher education sector, despite excellent practice in places, and codes of practice applying to all institutions receiving public money should be introduced." I would add that the same should apply to all both private and publically funded institutions.

21. "Protection for whistleblowers should be addressed - current arrangements are inadequate."

22. Phil Willis MP, the Chairman of the Committee, said: "We are extremely concerned that inconsistency in standards is rife and there is a reluctance to address this issue. The QAA needs radical transformation if we as a country are going to meet the needs of a 21st century higher education system with 2 million students."

Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Educator OIA

23. The OIA replaced the Visitor with regard to student complaints in March 2004 in turn it replaces the courts as a process of public justice. I raised various concerns within a Peoples Petition P-03-204 Public Accountability and Consultation in Higher Education to the Welsh Assembly, however, it was closed down because the Petition Committee claimed there was nothing more that they could do, referring it to the education committee for investigation was an option that did not occur to them.

Report of the OIA Student Survey 2009

24. I have submitted a new petition to the Welsh Assembly and written to the First Minister for Wales on various matters regarding the Ministerial Code including a correction concerning this report submitted to the Petitions Committee regarding Petition P-03-204. Here is an excerpt.

24.1. "Having raised serious concerns about the standards of the Students’ Complaints Scheme administered by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education known as the OIA and the lack of an effective Whistle blowing process, Leighton Andrews AM Minister for Children, Education & lifelong Learning stated on the 5th May 2010.

24.2. 1. "universities, students' unions and sector groups overwhelmingly endorsed the independence of the Independent Adjudicator, the Office and the Scheme."

24.3. 2. " the evidence gathered shows a direct association between outcome of complaint and complainants' views of whether the OIA's process was independent."

24.4. The first point is not an accurate representation of the conclusion of the report which stated:

24.5. "There was widespread dissatisfaction with the remit of the OIA. That academics escape any outside professional scrutiny in the way they conduct business is considered by many students to be inappropriate in the modern world. The inequality of arms between universities and students is a source of dissatisfaction, and the burden of proof on students considered by many to be inappropriately high. Many students were angry and frustrated that in the event of a conflict of evidence, they perceived that the HEI account was accepted and their own rejected for no satisfactory reason that they could see. The OIA was also criticised by students for failing to hold HEIs to account, failing to ensure fair procedures at the HEI level, and providing remedies that were insufficient and that would fail to ensure HEIs took the issues seriously. There was dissatisfaction with the time cases take, with a perceived failure to recognise the importance of timing to the student, particularly the academic year timetable, and a feeling that HEIs are indulged by the OIA, particularly over the summer. Many disabled students expressed dissatisfaction with the understanding of their complaints by the OIA. Students wanted to be told where they could go if dissatisfied with the OIA. Finally, it is important to recognise that for students a complaint starts at the beginning at the HEI, and ends at the end of the OIA process, and the holistic and continuous nature of this experience should be recognised." Page 82

24.6. Regarding the second point, the report showed dissatisfaction with the outcome was higher in older students who have more real world experience of acceptable standards. The conventional wisdom on this issue is that people are more likely to accept an unfavourable outcome if they feel that their concerns have been addressed, issues have been explained to them and there has been a fair and impartial due process. Clearly, this is not happening with regard to Universities and the OIA, to quote The Association for Consumer Research.

24.7. "...the expressed concern shown by service providers has an instrumental effect upon customer satisfaction with both the process and outcome. The degree to which the service provider indicated the following of policy also influenced customer satisfaction with the treatment received and the outcome."

24.8. I fail to see how the conclusion of the report constitutes an overwhelming endorsement of any aspect of this process and to clearly imply that the only reason students question the independence of the OIA is because they failed to have the complaint upheld only adds insult to injury. I also fail to see how there is any virtue in what is a blatant abuse of people and process and clearly not something to gloat over. The Students’ Complaints Scheme replaces the courts as a process of public justice and this survey however read is a serious cause for concern. "

25. If a major company such as a bank ran its complaints procedures the same way as universities then it would be fined millions by the relevant regulator.

26. With regard to my own situation concerning a Welsh university, I have been campaigning for a fair hearing for the last ten years, as this predates the OIA it is heard by the Visitor. For the last three years, I have been unable to submit a further petition on the basis of new material because the Visitor with the knowledge of the Vice Chancellor has delegated his Visitorial duties to the Sub Visitor. The Sub Visitor can only act if there is absence or incapacity, he cannot deputise as it is not specifically stated in the articles of government, moreover, the University Council and the Privy Council must approve any change in governance. There is no effective remedy without going to a Judicial Review, nothing within higher education regulation has jurisdiction to intervene, or so they say, I cannot submit a petition to someone who has no jurisdiction or power to award any damages. I have confronted those responsible with my concerns, which have been ‘noted’.

27. This raises the question of why they would do this and I am afraid I cannot give you the answer as you would not allow this to go before the committee or if it did, parts would be redacted. What I can say is that it is everything to do with reputations including a body outside of the university and nothing to do with the welfare or rights of students.

28. I have written to the Welsh Education Minister asking him why this institution is still in receipt of public funds, and a matter that he can take up with HEFCW. His refusal to answer a simple question is also a matter of complaint to the First Minister for Wales.

Gagging Requirements and Threats of legal Action

29. With all options for resolution closed down publishing to the internet is the only thing that can be done. However, because of doing this I was ‘required’ by legal giant Eversheds to sign an undertaking to remove all material and undertake never to tell the truth about my experiences, in return for the University not taking legal action for damages and a high court injunction. I refused and they backed down, as they knew that I was telling the truth.

30. Eversheds were involved in setting up the OIA where procedures are open to pure invention with impunity, it has been reported they have around 100 of the approximately 130 HEI’s in England and Wales as clients. I have in the past complained to the OFT that this virtual monopoly worked against the interests of students as consumers to preserve reputations and crush any form of complaint.

Public Awareness

31. It is often stated that one of the most effective means of regulation is public awareness; however, getting this kind of story into the media is almost impossible. Clearly, there are issues concerning the image of students not being believed and universities simply telling lies in the knowledge they are never going to be challenged. I pursued a complaint against the BBC that it only reports on wrongdoing in registered charities who represent the lower classes and ethnic minorities and not exempt charities such as universities and the Church. However, this point was lost on the BBC Trust upholding editorial judgement as a reason. There should be some kind of naming and shaming of universities to bring public awareness to these issues, as the biggest deterrent against any form of wrongdoing is the likelihood of being caught and publically exposed.

University Teaching Council

32. Clearly neither the QAA nor Universities are able to regulate professional standards, therefore, the only remedy is a University Teaching Council to act in the public interest and not in the self-interest of ‘autonomous’ institutions. Everyone in a profession or trade is required to carry out their tasks with a duty of care and competence and this is usually done via a professional regulatory body. The direct example is the Teaching Council for schoolteachers, however, a council for university teaching needs to address the concept of academic judgement that is abused with impunity together with a fit person test concerning professional conduct.

Health and Safety – Self-Harm and Suicide Risk

33. With the information from the Report of the OIA Student Survey 2009 on student experiences, it is an obvious question to ask if this has a direct effect on self harm and suicide. Here is an excerpt from the Guardian 30th November 2012 that highlights the financial and welfare vulnerability of students.

34. "The number of students who have taken their own lives in England and Wales has increased dramatically since the start of the recession. Between 2007 and 2011, suicides by male students in full-time higher education grew by 36%, from 57 to 78, while female student suicides almost doubled from 18 to 34, according to new figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS)."

35. The increase in student suicide is being blamed on the recession; the article does not research if there is any correlation with student complaints or misconduct and abuse of position and power. Universities are required to provide a safe environment for students and their response to student complaints should be included in a formal risk assessment with external monitoring.

February 2014

References

1. BBC News - Average UK student debts 'could hit £53,000'
Available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-14488312.

 

2. Petition P-03-204 Public Accountability and Consultation in Higher Education.
Available at http://www.senedd.assemblywales.org/documents/s1119/P-03-204%20Public%20Accountability%20and%20consultation%20in%20HE%20-%20briefing%20pack.pdf.

3. Students and Universities by the House of Commons Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Eleventh Report of Session 2008-09. No longer available on the internet.

4. Student Satisfaction with the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education Report of the OIA Student Survey 2009.
Available at http://www.oiahe.org.uk/downloads/Final-Report-of-the-OIA-Student-Survey-with-Appendices_4.pdf

5. The Association for Consumer Research - The Application of Procedural Justice Principles to Service Recovery Attempts: Outcomes For Customer Satisfaction.
Available at http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conference-proceedings.aspx?Id=8146

6. Student suicides rise during recession years – Guardian Newspaper 30 November 2012
Available at http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2012/nov/30/student-suicide-recession-mental-health