Your university agreed extra time, accessible materials, a different assessment arrangement or another form of disability support. When the assessment took place, the arrangement was missing. You now need both a practical solution and a clear record of what went wrong. An effective complaint connects the agreement, the failure and its consequences.
For students and parents in England and Wales, it is important to consider any academic appeal deadline at the same time. A complaint about support and an appeal against an assessment or progression decision can be connected without being the same process. Starting one does not necessarily protect the deadline for the other.
Identify what was agreed
Obtain the support plan, assessment arrangements, relevant emails and any subsequent changes. Check the date the arrangement took effect, the assessments covered and who was responsible for implementation. Distinguish a confirmed arrangement from a recommendation still awaiting a decision.
Record any conditions stated in the documents, such as a requirement to book a particular facility. If you completed a required step, preserve the evidence. If you did not, explain why and whether the instructions were clear or accessible. The aim is an accurate account of responsibility rather than an assumption that every administrative error had the same cause.
Describe what happened in concrete terms
Write a dated account of the assessment or teaching event. Explain the expected arrangement, what was provided and when the problem became apparent. Record who you told, the response and whether any temporary solution was offered. Keep contemporary messages and relevant incident records.
For an examination, details such as start time, interruption, missing equipment and the time a problem was resolved can matter. For inaccessible course materials, identify the files, dates needed and actual access barrier. Specific evidence is more useful than saying generally that the university did not support you.
Understand the legal framework without overstating the claim
The Equality Act 2010 provides the Human Rights & Civil Liberties framework for disability discrimination and reasonable adjustments in higher education. The EHRC explains that organisations have responsibilities to make reasonable adjustments and that what is reasonable depends on the circumstances. Whether a particular failure establishes a legal claim needs an assessment of the facts and applicable duties.
An agreed support plan is important evidence, but it is not the whole legal analysis. Identify the disadvantage, the relevant arrangement and the effect of the failure. Avoid assuming that every missed adjustment automatically entitles a student to a higher mark or a fixed compensation payment.
Separate academic standards from assessment arrangements
A university may say that a requirement protects academic or professional standards. Ask it to identify the standard and explain why the requested arrangement would affect it. There is a distinction between a competence standard and the method used to assess it.
The EHRC’s higher-education technical guidance explains that the duty does not require alteration of a competence standard itself, while adjustments to an assessment process may still need consideration. This distinction central to Education Law practice in this area should be applied to the actual course and task, rather than used as a slogan for either side
Explain the consequences with supporting evidence
Describe how the failure affected participation, completion or performance. Identify work left unfinished, material unavailable at a critical time or disruption caused by trying to resolve the problem. Keep the explanation tied to what can be shown, and distinguish observed effects from predictions about the mark you would otherwise have achieved.
If there were financial consequences, retain receipts and explain their connection to the failure. Separate additional costs from expenses you would have incurred anyway. Where health was affected, relevant contemporary support or medical records may assist, but avoid including unrelated sensitive information without a clear purpose.
Request an immediate fix where the problem continues
A formal complaint may take time. If another assessment is approaching, send a focused request for confirmation of the necessary arrangement, the responsible contact and how implementation will be checked. Give the assessment date and explain the previous failure so that the request is actionable.
Ask for a contingency if equipment or access fails again. For example, clarify whom to contact on the day and how an interruption will be recorded. These practical arrangements do not replace the complaint about past harm, but they may prevent the same problem affecting further work.
Choose and coordinate the internal routes
Read the complaints and academic appeals procedures. Identify whether the assessment outcome needs to be challenged separately and whether either procedure addresses failures in support. Ask the university how connected issues will be handled the kind of careful tracking any sound Dispute Resolution strategy requires keeping a written record of the answer.
The OIA’s guidance on disabled students addresses circumstances in which complaint or appeal arrangements themselves need adjustment. If the procedure is inaccessible, request a specific change, such as an accessible format or assistance with the process. Explain the barrier and check whether any deadline has actually been extended.
An illustrative complaint
Imagine a fictional student whose written plan confirms an accessible examination paper and additional time. The paper supplied cannot be read using the agreed software, and part of the examination is lost while staff arrange an alternative. The complaint includes the plan, incident chronology and contemporaneous messages.
The student asks for a reasoned academic remedy and confirmation that future arrangements will be tested in advance. The example does not establish what remedy must be granted or describe an Aldwych Legal case. It shows how the request can connect the failure to a practical outcome rather than merely express understandable frustration.
State what you want the university to do
Set out the requested outcomes in a short, prioritised list. These might include correcting future arrangements, reconsidering the affected assessment through the proper process, explaining the failure, reimbursing evidenced additional costs or addressing the impact through another appropriate remedy. Link each request to a particular consequence.
Do not ask a complaints officer simply to award the grade you hoped to receive without addressing the academic regulations. Equally, an apology alone may not address an unresolved progression problem. A clear request helps the university distinguish practical action, academic decisions and any financial element.
Review the response against your evidence
Check whether the outcome addresses the actual agreed adjustment, the implementation failure and the effect on the student. If it says support was available, compare that conclusion with the dates and records. If it relies on a policy, obtain the relevant version and examine whether it answers the issue.
A review request should identify the material point overlooked or the reason the conclusion is challenged. Keep the internal deadline in view. For eligible complaints after the internal process, the OIA offers an independent review route; it is not a court deciding a statutory discrimination claim. Its published explanation of judicial review discusses that distinction.
Consider separate legal deadlines promptly
A complaint or academic appeal does not automatically suspend every legal time limit. If a discrimination claim or urgent court remedy may be relevant, obtain advice on the correct route and deadline early. Do not assume that waiting for the university’s final answer is always safe.
Aldwych Legal operates in non-reserved legal services and can work with appropriately authorised solicitors and barristers where reserved litigation or advocacy is required. The appropriate arrangement depends on the case, rather than the label attached to the complaint.
Support from Aldwych Legal
Before submitting, check the attachments against the complaint itself. Number the support plan, incident account and outcome letter so that the reviewer can follow each reference. Keep a complete copy of the submission and delivery confirmation; this also makes any later review easier to prepare.
Adam Hussain’s education work includes university disputes and disability-related claims. Aldwych Legal can help review the support records, prepare a chronology and coordinate a focused complaint with relevant academic appeal issues. Students and parents across England and Wales can email info@aldwychlegal.com or call or WhatsApp 020 4584 2472, providing the support plan, decision letters and upcoming deadlines.
About Adam Hussain
Adam Hussain is Aldwych Legal’s Founder & Managing Director and head lawyer. His education practice includes university disputes and disability-related claims. The work involves examining support arrangements, institutional decisions and the evidence needed for a focused challenge. He holds an LL.M. in International Business Law from King’s College London, has completed Bar training and Practical Legal Training, and is a PhD doctoral researcher in Legal Science at Royal Holloway, University of London.
