Time to let it go.

But, but, they are an educational charity, and formed by a Royal Charter!

So says the OP in a post from over 30 months ago.

My educational institution is a charity incorporated by Royal Charter

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419412-I-have-been-refused-to-resit-an-examination&p=4671942#post4671942

How likely is the OP to let it go?.

Should we instead expect (as part of the "these are all separate, distinct, and unlinked events, all deserving individual threads", from someone who must be either the unluckiest person alive, or contributing to their own misfortune....) to hear that this is part of a new disagreement with a new educational provider ....

(If so, I bet the provider wishes they'd checked your academic references / heard all of your academic history ......)

My new thread "Why complaint procedures have so many stages?' has entirely disappeared. Can you put it back"

My new thread "Why complaint procedures have so many stages?' has entirely disappeared. Can you put it back"

In plain sight for me http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?481193-Why-complaint-procedures-have-so-many-stages-(3-Viewing)-nbsp

Oh dear god

this is the same establishment that failed to take into account your latent brilliance when not giving you a degree just because you didnt earn one is it?

No?

another one is conspiring with your previous college, past employers, prospective landlord and even retail outlets to cause you such trauma?.

Please tell us more,

we cant wait to hear all about it unless it is the same tired old moaning we have already had plenty of.

What you are asking for appears to be a change in the procedure because you didnt like the one they have and you really want a different result.

It isnt going to happen.

You answered your own whinge by stating there wasnt anyone higher to handle it.

If I were the Vice Chancellor of a university and the governing body sacked me I cant say that I demand to have the vice chancellor decide the matter because that what it says in the uni procedure. The matter has undergone due process.

As a student you have many different courses of action to make a complaint

but you appear to have either ignored these or failed to tell us that you did follow them

and then omitted to tell us the outcome because again, you didnt like that result.

So, who didnt you go through? tutor, senior tutor, course supervisor, Director of Undergraduate Studies, Head of Dept, head of school/division/faculty, college tutor/registrar, Vice Chancellor and finally the Office of the Independent Adjudicator.

Did you use the last 2 stages or just come here with your complaint knowing what the result would be and hope to get some sympathy for your supposed victimhood.

It is instead purely an academic question because the OP wants to understand the process better, so hush now.

(Damn, that's another line the OP has used before so is less available for re-use.......)

ericsbrother says

“What you are asking for appears to be a change in the procedure because you didnt like the one they have and you really want a different result. It isnt going to happen.

As a student you have many different courses of action to make a complaint

but you appear to have either ignored these or failed to tell us that you did follow them and then omitted to tell us the outcome because again, you didnt like that result

Did you use the last 2 stages or just come here with your complaint knowing what the result would be and hope to get some sympathy for your supposed victimhood”.

However I did nothing wrong. It was only that allegedly one manager has left his position and no-one was yet appointed at his post i.e. the post was vacant. The situation was that there was no level 3 because the existing level 2 was used on level 2

My educational institution should amend its complaint procedure to explain very clearly in which exceptional circumstances it can omit a stage of the complaint procedure. However it is important that as it currently stands the complaint procedure does not allow the possibility of omitting one stage of the complaint procedure. And I would like to be able to explain efficiently to my educational institution that it would not be fair that it does not comply with the three stages of its own complaint procedure

The excuse put forward by my educational institution not to provide me with three replies is that it complies with the rules because my complaint was escalated to the top of the chain faster. However this is wrong because according to the rules I am entitled to receive three responses by three independent managers and not only two responses by only two managers. The difference is important because I have new evidence that I would like to put forward in a third stage of the complaint procedure and I cannot

There is someone above the third manager but my educational institution does not want he replies to my last complaint under stage 3 because it says that he is not involved in the complaint procedure.

Before complaining to the OIA I would like to try a last time to convince my educational institution but for this I need to know how properly to say the things in an efficient way. I would like to know which strong arguments I can put forward about the importance of each stage, the importance to have the complaint procedure entirely exhausted and about the fact that if it does not comply with all the three stages the processing of my complaint will be frustrated and corrupted....etc

I know what to do. It is how to express what I want to say that I have difficulties with.

My thread is not about the strength of my case but about the procedural issue of my educational institution having skipped one of the three stages of its own complaint procedure.

It is not advice that I really need but rather to know how to say the things in an efficient way

Your concentrating so hard at something so small your missing the bigger picture.

You cant see the wood for the trees

Oh and I think your educational establishment can Say by a member of staff who deals with complaints have left and we have not yet filled the role would be classed as exceptional.

If you look at single atoms you miss the beauty of the universe

if you have genuine, critical new evidence raise a new complaint. But beware that if it is evidence you could reasonably have had and raised the first time around, they can refuse to hear it.

It is not advice that I really need but rather to know how to say the things in an efficient way

Then we would need to know the exact content of what you are trying to say efficiently

resources, are we allowed to know what this complaint is about please?

Are you sure that your educational institution is going to like you explaining why their complaint procedure is wrong and/or unfair? It might make life difficult for you.

HB

It is a different thread and I would like you separate it from my other threads. The reason is that ACAS concerns employer and has nothing to do with educational institutions (I am a student and not a teacher). My thread about ACAS concerns old cases and I have moved on since.

Just noticed this.

This is the employment/ minimum wage board. So, not that useful for enquiries relating to students and courses of study. Maybe try your student union?

Emmzzi

The op is refering to another thread that complained down to the nth degree on an employment issue. I think a forum mod merged the treads as the op was talking drivvle in the end. They will do the same here, eventually.

your argument is that you would like three people to tell you "No" rather than two?

I am going to lay bets that the policy, whatever is is, states that the process NORMALLY (or some such word) operates on three stages.

It is exceptional that any policy doesn't have some form of conditional clause.

Just like NORMALLY disciplinary processes start at a low level and proceed to more serious ones

- but the employer can slip up to more serious stages of outcomes if they wish to.

Emmzzi is correct that you are posting in the wrong place,

but regardless of that, some really good advice is to pack it in now.

You appear to spend far too much of your time up to your ears in arguments with services and employers.

When this is a repeated feature of someone's life, it suggests that self examination will be more productive than complaints.

Emmzzi says

“if you have genuine, critical new evidence raise a new complaint. But be aware that if it is evidence you coud reasonably have had and rasied the first time around, they can refuse to hear it.”

I have already made a separate additional complaint about this new evidence because my educational institution did not want to reply to it under stage 3 because it says that the complaint procedure was already completed because stage 2 was stage 3. My educational institution has rejected this additional separate complaint because it says that it is linked to my initial complaint. Hence it does not want to reply to this new evidence at all

Emmzzi says

“Then we would need to know the exact content of what you are trying to say efficiently”

What I want to be able to explained efficiency is

“I can put forward about the importance of each stage, the importance to have the complaint procedure entirely exhausted and about the fact that if it does not comply with all the three stages the processing of my complaint will be frustrated and corrupted....etc”

Emmzzi says

“This is the employment/ minimum wage board. So, not that useful for enquiries relating to students and courses of study. Maybe try your student union?”

Emmzzi is right my new thread is about student issues and not employment issues so I would be grateful to you if you can put it back to the student issues section of this forum so that other members of this forum interested in student issue can have a look at it and maybe provide me with important responses to it

honeybee13 says

“resources, are we allowed to know what this complaint is about please?”

I will need to write a post several-page long to explain my complaint and I can be recognised which could make my life difficult. Anyway this new thread is about a procedural issue and not about the substance of my complaint i.e. my educational institution has not complied with the three stages of its complaint procedure.

honeybee13 says

“Are you sure that your educational institution is going to like you explaining why their complaint procedure is wrong and/or unfair? It might make life difficult for you.”

The complaint procedure of my educational institution is not wrong/unfair. The issue is that it simply does not comply with it

Please try your student union.

This is where their expertise lies.

I think you need to be able to discuss your exact situation in confidence;

no one here will be able to help based on generalisations like those presented.

So please do go and talk to someone at your student union for help.

It does comply.

They say under exceptional circumstances they can drop it to 2

A member of staff leaving and not being replaced is exceptional.

This post is quickly going down the route of your others.

I ask admin to lock it before I becomes convoluted

Sangie595 says

“- but the employer can slip up to more serious stages of outcomes if they wish to.

Emmzzi is correct that you are posting in the wrong place,”

I would like to reply that it is not a private employer which does what he wants but a public body which has to comply with its public duty to act in the interest of the public by complying with the three stages of its complaint procedure. Moreover I have not posted in the wrong place it is someone in the forum who has moved my new thread from the student section to the employment section

Emmzzi says

“Please try your student union.

This is where their expertise lies.”

I have already talked to the Student Union which told me that the complaint procedure has three stages and not only two and that they do not have the power to force my educational institution to comply with the three stages of the complaint procedure if it does not want

Sgtbush says

“It does comply.

They say under exceptional circumstances they can drop it to 2

A member of staff leaving and not being replaced is exceptional”

However the complaint procedure does not make any reference to exceptional circumstances which allow my educational institution to drop one of the three stages of the complaint procedure.

I think that my educational institution is simply wrong and I would like to be able to make it understand

It is pretty common to have a three stage appeals procedure. Most councils have this. It is also similar to how the courts work - appeal from the county court to the High Court to the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court.

It is also pretty usual for later stages in the appeals process to only be about the original complaint. Often you can't raise new evidence. Your evidence should have been in the original complaint and available to the initial decision makers, not introduced half way through the process.

It does not sound like you have a firm basis for making the educational institution do anything. Complaints procedures usually do not have legal force and cannot be legally enforced. You certainly can't force an educational institution to "reply" to evidence.

Either you have a legal claim or you do not - a complaints procedure doesn't change that.

I was not able to put forward my new evidence during my initial complaint because it was concealed from me by my educational institution and I have to make a Freedom of Information request to have it.

It is why I think that it will be good to have my complaint processed through the three stages and not only two to have this clarified and this is the reason why my educational institution does not want.

The issue is not to force my educational institution to do anything that it does not want but to make it understand that it is in its own interest to comply with its own complaint procedure to avoid further complaint to the OIA or litigation

Couple of links:

Setting up an academies complaints procedure: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/setting-up-an-academies-complaints-procedure

School complaints procedures: guidance for schools: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/school-complaints-procedures

Office of the Independent Adjudicator: http://www.oiahe.org.uk/

Department for Education: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education

Education Act 2011: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/21/contents/enacted

The issue is not to force my educational institution to do anything that it does not want but to make it understand that it is in its own interest to comply with its own complaint procedure to avoid further complaint to the OIA or litigation

The most effective way to make it realise that is for it to have to go through the OIA or litgation, so I'd get a deadlock letter or whatever they call them asap and just get on with it. They have made their position clear. no amount of epic letter writing or whining will change their mind; only action.

Thread moved to the Students forum.

HB

Oh jeeeeeze.....

I'm reply to your reply,

You possted the statement on exceptional circumstances to which I elaborated...

Please admin, lock this post out

the complaint here seems to be (let us take an old fashioned industrial setting as an example) that the shop manager said no to somehting and he is complaining that the foremen wasnt allowed to say no first.

The factory manager also said no

so the end result will always be the same regardless of the opinion of the foreman.

He makes it clear there is no argument about the facts of the matter,

just hoping that some pettifogging will somehow allow the institution to be forced to award him his degree that he hasnt passed.

I have found in the following website

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Guidance/A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person.pdf

a document called “A_Handbook_for_Litigants_in_Person”

This seems a useful document. However in chapter 8.4 of this document I have found something strange because it is stated

“8.14 Provided you set out your case on all the facts necessary to prove your claim your pleading will pass muster. Make sure that the facts are set out in chronological order and that you do no more than summarise them. The full details of the relevant facts will be set out later in your witness statements. The old adage ‘Facts not law; Facts not evidence’ remains as true today as ever. It means that you do not have to set out the legal basis of your claim in your pleading, simply the facts that go to make up your claim. Further, you do not set out the evidence, ie the details, just the basic facts that go to make up your claim Note down the elements of your cause of action, and make sure that you are in a position to prove the facts necessary to make good each element”

We can notice the passage

“The old adage ‘Facts not law; Facts not evidence’ remains as true today as ever. It means that you do not have to set out the legal basis of your claim in your pleading, simply the facts that go to make up your claim”

Which is very strange because it says that I do not have to set out the legal basis of my claim in my pleading simply the facts that go to make up my claim. However I did like this and my claim was struck out because the judge says that it was not properly pleaded because I put forward the facts but not the law in my claim form. Therefore I would like to know if this documents which has been written by six circuit judges is accurate?