Decision report 201004659

Summary
Mr C said that the university did not follow their complaints policy when considering his complaint. He said they delayed and, because he was not allowed to proceed to the final stages of their complaints procedure, he was denied assistance from the ASK service (a student support service). Mr C made eight complaints to the university. Because of their overlapping nature and the voluminous correspondence associated with them, the university decided to deal with them together in terms of the Student Complaints Procedure. They gave Mr C their decision just over four months later, telling him that their involvement in the matter was at an end and that he should complain to the Ombudsman if he was unhappy with their decision. Our investigation determined that, although the university had at all times been courteous and objective in the face of a huge flow of correspondence from Mr C, they failed to follow their stated complaints procedure by allowing him to appeal their decision to them. Similarly, we agreed that there had been delay in dealing with the matter and that, as a consequence of the university's refusal to proceed to an appeal, the ASK service had withdrawn their involvement. Our recommendations were aimed at ensuring that the university follow their own policies correctly in future.

Recommendations
We recommend that University of Strathclyde:
• remind staff of the importance of following their stated complaints procedure;
• apologise to the complainant for failing to inform him of his right to appeal at stage 3 of their complaints procedure;
• in the event that Mr C wishes to appeal any decision made on his stage 2 complaints to the university, we recommend that his appeals are considered in terms of stage 3 of their stated complaints procedures; and
• apologise to Mr C for their delay in dealing with his complaint made in July 2010.