Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Actually there wasn't a massive amount of work to do on the WS.  The "meat" was there because of the great work you'd already done. Here is a version which I think is nigh-on finished. However, with Easter there are a few days for the other regulars to suggest tweaks. Defendant WS.pdf
    • Hi all, We bought a part to fix our washing machine approx 13 months ago direct from the manufacturer of the washing machine via phone. This part then failed 13 months later, as confirmed by their own engineer, who was sent by the manufacturer (who is also the retailer for the part) FoC. The engineer actually installed a replacement part, the machine came back to life, but they then removed the part used for testing (and ours reinstalled) as "we would be charged for it". The retailer are refusing to replace the part, stating that they only warranty parts for 90 days. When I stated that I believed the Consumer Rights Act gives me longer than that, they insinuated that it did not, and this was repeated by many representatives. AIUI for goods bought more than 6 months ago, I need to get an engineers report to confirm the part has failed? Or that it has failed due to manufacturing issues? Or would the companies own engineers report suffice? Also, does anyone have any other decent contact details for Hotpoint (or the Whirlpool group)? Thanks, GH
    • Thank you for that "read me", It's a lot to digest, lots of legal procedure. There was one thing that I was going to mention to you,  but in one of the conversations in that thread it was mentioned that there may be spies on the Forum,  this is something that I've read quite some time ago in a previous thread. What I had in mind was to wait for the thirty days after their reply to my CCA request and then send the unenforceable letter. I was hoping that an absence of signature could be the Silver Bullet but it seems that there are lot of layers to peel on this Onion.  
    • love the extra £1000 charge for confidentialy there BF   Also OP even if they don't offer OOC it doesn't mean your claim isn't good. I had 3 against EVRi that were heard over the last 3 weeks. They sent me emails asking me to discontinue as I wouldn't win. Went infront of a judge and won all 3.    Just remember the law is on your side. The judges will be aware of this.   Where you can its important to try to point out at the hearing the specific part of the contract they breached. I found this was very helpful and the Judge made reference to it when they gave their judgements and it seemed this was pretty important as once you have identified a specific breach the matter turns straight to liability. From there its a case of pointing out the unlawfullness of their insurance and then that should be it.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

What are my options for a remark? Taking an access course


John85123
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3170 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I started an Access to medicine course (level 3, basically A levels, but a bit easier than A levels) in September last year. I received the highest possible grade in all my modules except one.

 

The possible grades are as follows: pass, merit and distinction. In general for these types of course a pass = above 40%, a distinction = above 70% and a merit is in between. However, instead of % grading they have very subjective grade criteria, from which the marker gets to choose a grade for each criteria and then average them all for the final grade.

 

The module in question was a research paper, in which I got a "pass". The requirements called for a 3,500 research paper. We could have covered anything as long as it was related to medicine.

 

Normally the projects are marked by one particular tutor, but this year another tutor marked half of the projects and the work was split between them. My work was marked by this new tutor, who was my project supervisor. My project supervisor gave me feedback on my final draft on the day of submission, and she did this to at least 3-4 other people. I implemented her suggestions (even though a few of them had nothing to do with the aim of my project - which suggested she didn't know what the aim of my project was). Some of these people got extensions from the course coordinator due to the last day feedback, but as my supervisors suggestions were brief and she never indicated that she thought my project was in trouble, so I submitted it. Throughout the year I got the impression she had not read any of the drafts I had sent her because her feedback often asked why I hadn't included certain information in my project, information that was actually in the draft in her hand - she just didn't read it and had obviously just skimmed it for a minute.

 

Before I handed in my paper, I sent it to an A level extended level project tutor (a very similar piece of work) who went through it for me. She offered me advice on how to improve it, and said in its current form it is worth about an A/A*. I made the suggested improvements and handed it in. When I found out that I got a "pass", I immediately went to my course coordinator to complain. He told me it is very unlikely that it will be remarked by someone else, and kept implying that I just don't like my grade.

 

He took me to see the project to make sure the grades on his clipboard were not just misrecorded, and I had indeed got "passes" in pretty much all the grade descriptors for my research paper. On the back of the grade paper there was a brief 4-5 line comment on my work from the person who marked it. The comments only said positive things. I confronted my course coordinator about this, and he came out with "we focus on the positive here".

 

He looked at it and said "well, looks a bit brief to me. Maybe that is why you got that grade. It seems to be clear and concise with no waffle, but maybe you didn't have enough content. How many words is it?". My paper was 5,652 words (before references and table of contents), 2,152 more than required. We were told we were allowed to go over. He said the most he can do is pass my comments on to the person who marked it, but I'm not getting a remark from a different person.

 

This is another defense he used to avoid giving a remark: We even have an external moderator” I was told, “who looked at a number of the projects”. I suspect their role is mostly to make sure that the college isn’t handing out distinctions to people who don't deserve them (which would devalue the course and course's designer and validator). These external moderators do not do blind, independent regrades of work which are then compared to the original grade to see if they match. GCSEs and A levels also have external moderators, but this is not used as an excuse to not have another person look at work that is in question

 

I opened a formal complaint with the college, which said they would investigate if "our assessment and moderation procedures were followed". I asked if this would include another person who wasn't involved in the dispute taking a look at my research paper, and they responded with "As this is now part of the college complaint process I regret I am unable to discuss any aspect of it."

 

They have not told me the outcome of the investigation yet, but I want to know what my options are once they have responded so that I can prepare.

Edited by John85123
Link to post
Share on other sites

I started an Access to medicine course (level 3, basically A levels, but a bit easier than A levels) in September last year. I received the highest possible grade in all my modules except one.

 

The possible grades are as follows: pass, merit and distinction. In general for these types of course a pass = above 40%, a distinction = above 70% and a merit is in between. However, instead of % grading they have very subjective grade criteria, from which the marker gets to choose a grade for each criteria and then average them all for the final grade.

 

The module in question was a research paper, in which I got a "pass". The requirements called for a 3,500 research paper. We could have covered anything as long as it was related to medicine.

 

Normally the projects are marked by one particular tutor, but this year another tutor marked half of the projects and the work was split between them. My work was marked by this new tutor, who was my project supervisor. My project supervisor gave me feedback on my final draft on the day of submission, and she did this to at least 3-4 other people. I implemented her suggestions (even though a few of them had nothing to do with the aim of my project - which suggested she didn't know what the aim of my project was). Some of these people got extensions from the course coordinator due to the last day feedback, but as my supervisors suggestions were brief and she never indicated that she thought my project was in trouble, so I submitted it. Throughout the year I got the impression she had not read any of the drafts I had sent her because her feedback often asked why I hadn't included certain information in my project, information that was actually in the draft in her hand - she just didn't read it and had obviously just skimmed it for a minute.

 

Before I handed in my paper, I sent it to an A level extended level project tutor (a very similar piece of work) who went through it for me. She offered me advice on how to improve it, and said in its current form it is worth about an A/A*. I made the suggested improvements and handed it in. When I found out that I got a "pass", I immediately went to my course coordinator to complain. He told me it is very unlikely that it will be remarked by someone else, and kept implying that I just don't like my grade.

 

He took me to see the project to make sure the grades on his clipboard were not just misrecorded, and I had indeed got "passes" in pretty much all the grade descriptors for my research paper. On the back of the grade paper there was a brief 4-5 line comment on my work from the person who marked it. The comments only said positive things. I confronted my course coordinator about this, and he came out with "we focus on the positive here".

 

He looked at it and said "well, looks a bit brief to me. Maybe that is why you got that grade. It seems to be clear and concise with no waffle, but maybe you didn't have enough content. How many words is it?". My paper was 5,652 words (before references and table of contents), 2,152 more than required. We were told we were allowed to go over. He said the most he can do is pass my comments on to the person who marked it, but I'm not getting a remark from a different person.

 

This is another defense he used to avoid giving a remark: We even have an external moderator” I was told, “who looked at a number of the projects”. I suspect their role is mostly to make sure that the college isn’t handing out distinctions to people who don't deserve them (which would devalue the course and course's designer and validator). These external moderators do not do blind, independent regrades of work which are then compared to the original grade to see if they match. GCSEs and A levels also have external moderators, but this is not used as an excuse to not have another person look at work that is in question

 

I opened a formal complaint with the college, which said they would investigate if "our assessment and moderation procedures were followed". I asked if this would include another person who wasn't involved in the dispute taking a look at my research paper, and they responded with "As this is now part of the college complaint process I regret I am unable to discuss any aspect of it."

 

They have not told me the outcome of the investigation yet, but I want to know what my options are once they have responded so that I can prepare.

 

Who actually issues your grade?

The college or an examining body (such as AQA, Edexcel or OCR)?

 

If an examining body then the remark won't be done by the same examiner. If the college : then per the college's policy.

However, it seems to me that where an appeal is based on "possible wrong view of examiner" rather than "clerical error" there seems little point in asking the same examiner to go over the same ground.

 

Does the grade fit with your expected grade? Were they anticipating a distinction for the report too?

 

Edited to add : example (albeit from 30+ years ago)

A relative was expected to get an A in A-level politics.

(A* didn't exist back then ....)

They got a D. The school appealed to the examining board (unprompted by the student, such was the surprise).

 

They had answered one question from a very left-wing viewpoint. Their answer was apparently logical, precise, and well argued .... Just not what was in line with the examiner's _personal_ political viewpoint.

 

Re-marked by a different examiner : result - A.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The college issues the grade. We were not given an "expected grade" for our modules, but a reference was written for me by the course coordinator and sent to universities with my UCAS application.

 

The reference included "Early assessments indicate that he has the potential to get distinctions across all 6 subjects on the Access to Medicine course. He is pro-active in consulting his tutors with questions to enhance his learning to the highest level after clearly studying in depth in advance".

 

"all 6 subjects" includes my report. None of my university choices will even consider me now due to this grade which is a complete divergence from all my other grades.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The college issues the grade. We were not given an "expected grade" for our modules, but a reference was written for me by the course coordinator and sent to universities with my UCAS application.

 

The reference included "Early assessments indicate that he has the potential to get distinctions across all 6 subjects on the Access to Medicine course. He is pro-active in consulting his tutors with questions to enhance his learning to the highest level after clearly studying in depth in advance".

 

"all 6 subjects" includes my report. None of my university choices will even consider me now due to this grade which is a complete divergence from all my other grades.

 

Regardless of your ongoing appeal, the college should be able to provide you with their PUBLISHED appeals policy.

You need to see if this makes any comment on re-marking (and in particular, use of the same or different examiner)

 

I would still advocate that a "re-mark" by the same examiner could look like a rubber stamp of the original grade rather than a true appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The college charter says "

On Your Course The college will ensure that you have:

• A right to appeal against assessment decisions"

 

This is their appeals policy: ww w.cwa.ac.uk/documents/academicappeal.pdf

 

I had to put a space in the link because it said I can's post links until I have 10 posts

 

http://www.cwa.ac.uk/documents/academicappeal.pdf

Edited by citizenB
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have popped the link into your thread, if it is the correct one, I will edit out the one with the gap for you :)

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The college charter says "

On Your Course The college will ensure that you have:

• A right to appeal against assessment decisions"

 

This is their appeals policy: www.cwa.ac.uk/documents/academicappeal.pdf

 

I had to put a space in the link because it said I can's post links until I have 10 posts

 

http://www.cwa.ac.uk/documents/academicappeal.pdf

 

Looks like you may need to follow the appeals procedure against the "Academic Judgement", if need be taking it to the Appeal Panel on the basis of "Grounds C", if your current representations aren't successful.

 

They will provide an "Academic Decision" according to their policy, which means at least two assessors / examiners : so it won't be "a rubber stamp exercise performed ONLY by the original examiner".

Link to post
Share on other sites

What concerns me greatly is that it say that "Grounds C" is only considered in exceptional circumstances.

 

It also says that "An internal quality assurer will review the assessment concerned and will reach an Academic Decision with the assessor", which suggests to me that the original assessor will still be involved in the final decision.

 

It also says " The learner should provide the relevant Faculty Manager with a written description detailing how the grading criteria have been incorrectly applied"

I am also not sure what kind of evidence I should be submitting. Should I be sending the project to A level tutors, for example, and then get a review of it from them in writing?

 

I've noticed that the work I submitted is similar in quality to the exemplar research papers kept in the library, should I have be sending copies of these to A level tutors along with my research paper for comparison, so that the comparison can be used in an appeal?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

They have finally responded to my complaint. They claimed that "The assessor had incorrectly transferred the gradings from the assignment frontsheet", which means that my grade will be changed from a pass to a merit.

 

The way it works is, if you have 4 passes on the grading front sheet, and 2 merits - they take the median grade which would be a pass. The problem is that I was shown the grading front sheet and it did have more passes than merits on it - so I have been told a lie. Someone has switched the sheet.

 

I am now faced with trying to appeal, but I am not sure how to gather evidence for such an appeal

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...