Law firm Eversheds subject of complaint to the Office of Fair Trading

May 29, 2008 - PRLog -- In my opinion  Eversheds LLP has abused its dominant market position against the interests of students as vulnerable consumers

The Student as a Vulnerable Consumer

 When a student attends university,  they enter into a contract for their education and therefore they should have  the same consumer rights as everyone else. Students are vulnerable in that a  large loan is necessary for tuition fees, accommodation and living expenses  etc. If the student is forced to out of the university their future is not only  destroyed but are also left with large debts to pay off. Because of then above situation  there is a serious inequality open to abuse of power and exploitation of  students, in more ways than one.
   
 
   The introduction of tuition fees has  broken down the social class barriers of university entry; however, the high  drop out rate of around 20% suggests that students from disadvantaged  backgrounds are being weeded out using other methods of gate keeping.
   
 
   A working party on students suicide  rates concluded that it was average for the general population. What they  failed to do which is essential in any health and safety issue is to assess the  risk from which they then measure the outcome. Common sense tells us two things  about universities, firstly they are a social institution and secondly they  provide a purpose in life both of which are indicators of a low risk  environment. Therefore, if the suicide rate is about average per head of  population it indicates it is too high.
   
 
 The student complaints scheme set up  under the Higher Education Act 2004 is run by a company that is 4/5ths owned by  the Universities and operates as the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for  Higher Education known as the OIA. This arrangement does not meet the criteria  of independence for other regulatory bodies.
   
 
   It is well known that the major sociological  cause of suicide and deviant behaviour in institutions is caused by the  breakdown of the rules and regulations by those in authority. What compounds  the problem is the realisation that there is no regulation of the conduct of  universities towards its students. This creates a situation of total and  complete hopelessness for anyone on the receiving end of an injustice.
   
 
   I have raised these matters with the  financial regulator the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales known as  HEFCW who despite claims on their website say they have no jurisdiction to  intervene. Their subsidiary the Quality Assurance Agency known as the QAA who  makes academic assessments on their behalf and has a website that states its  mission is to reassure the public on standards in Welsh Higher Education. Has  stated it has no locus in these matters and does not allow complaints from the  public and God forbid students.
   
 
   The  Welsh Assembly Government also claims that it has no jurisdiction of these  matters has passed the Public Audit (Wales) Act 2004, which bans the taxpaying public  from being able to make any complaint concerning financial matters and took  away the power of the Auditor General for Wales to intervene.
   
 
 The  Charity Act 2006 will require universities to register and for an appointed  regulator to monitor their charitable activities. I have been lobbying the  Charity Commission to highlight the fact that nobody regulates on behalf of the  student as a consumer. The universities must pass the ‘public benefit tests’ of  charitable purpose and in the case of the University of Wales Lampeter I have a  mountain of evidence to suggest because of the institutionalised abuse and discrimination  against students they are going to fail.

Complaints Procedures and the Student  Complaints Scheme under the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher  Education (OIA)

 Universities give students every  encouragement to use the student complaints scheme, as it is so open to abuse  and corruption that it is being used to weed out students who complain. I have  hard evidence that ‘statements of completion’ to say that complaints procedures  have been fully complained with have been contradicted by senior managers.  Serious allegations are concocted and documents are fabricated and destroyed as  necessary for the student to stand no chance of redress either by using the complaints  scheme or in law.
   
 
 Complaints to the Office of the  Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA) take so long the student  looses the right to a Judicial Revue. So many students are cynical of this  process that increasing numbers are resorting to law.
   
 
 However, the chances of winning are  so small a student is going to end up with an order for costs against them for  which the university will apply for bankruptcy proceedings to or send in the  bailiffs reclaim the costs. This after having destroyed his or her life  prospects just to make sure nobody else complains, and advised to do so by  Eversheds.
   
 
 There has been a 27% rise in  complaints to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education  this year. The findings of the OIA are  unenforceable, which means a student can go through a psychological destructive  complaints process just to have it ignored.

Eversheds LLP – Abuse of Dominant Market  Position against the interests of students as consumers and universities as  public bodies.

 Eversheds LLP has around 100 UK universities on their books including the University of Wales Lampeter. Various listings on the  internet for higher education solicitors state that Eversheds has the higher  education market ‘sewn up’. I think ‘stitched up’ would be a better  description.
   
 
 Eversheds were instrumental in  setting up the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA)  for which it provided legal advice. The OIA state there is no conflict of  interest on this issue. However, it does not meet the standard of impartiality  in other regulatory bodies nor in the mind of Joe Public.
   
 
 In my opinion the above factors have  created a position whereby universities such as the University of Wales Lampeter, can pervert and obstruct complaints  procedures with impunity in the knowledge that Eversheds will resort to bully  boy tactics the give the complaining student a psychological kicking. Furthermore,  they can then pervert the students complaint scheme in the knowledge that the OIA being 4/5ths owned by the universities is not going to rock the boat.
   
 
 In my opinion the conduct of Eversheds in concealing the corruption of officers and from the  University Council has put the University at risk of losing its charitable  status under the Charity Act 2006.
   
 
 For publishing these facts to The Lamp Post ,  I have been threatened with legal action and a high court injunction by  Eversheds on behalf of the University of Wales Lampeter. Such  threats were without foundation and simply made to conceal the misconduct of officers and staff.
   
 
 Eversheds have recently made further  threats and resorted to personal abuse to prevent the University Council from  being named on my website, which is the only way they can find out what is  going on.

Trevor Mayes