Decision report 201102987

Summary
Mr C made a complaint to the university and proceeded through the first two stages of their complaints procedure. As he remained dissatisfied at the conclusion of the second stage of the complaints procedure he submitted a third stage complaint.

When approaching the escalated stage, the university decided that it did not meet the criteria for consideration at stage three. Mr C did not provide the required new information (which was any evidence that there was bias or prejudice on the part of those who dealt with the complaint or that showed a breach of the complaints procedure).

The university gave Mr C their decision with a further explanation in relation to some of his points of complaint. They informed him of his right to approach the SPSO if he remained dissatisfied. Mr C complained to us about the university’s actions, saying that that they had failed to provide access to the university’s complaints procedure.

We found that the university had considered Mr C’s appeal submission and that they had reached a discretionary decision, as they are entitled to do, that the criteria for an appeal had not been met. We decided, therefore, that we would not consider his complaints further.