Universities issue pre-action letter over withdrawal of student maintenance funding

The nine universities warn that this abrupt decision stems from the failure of the Student Loans Company to provide clear and consistent guidance, or to meaningfully engage with the sector. Taken with minimal notice, the move has caused serious financial distress for affected students and placed many at risk of being unable to continue their studies.

The withdrawal has particularly affected those balancing work, caring responsibilities, and education. For these students, maintenance loans are essential to cover basic living costs.

Alongside this action, the National Union of Students (NUS) continue to petition the government as the severity of their decision is realised and a petition containing more than 13,000 signatures is set to be presented to the Department for Education today (Thursday 16 April).

The institutions strongly reject the classification of in-person, timetabled weekend teaching as “distance learning” and argue that the policy not only defies common sense but is also inconsistent with the Student Support Regulations as interpreted and applied since 2011. It makes no sense for face-to-face study delivered on Saturdays and Sundays to be “distance learning” while identical provision during the week is “in-person”.

The group are dismayed that the DfE and SLC are characterising this change in policy as an error by universities when classifying their courses. Universities have followed and applied the SLC guidance on course classification for years and this recent shift in guidance from DFE and SLC has been implemented inconsistently and without meaningful engagement with the sector.

The group of universities that have co-signed the formal legal letter understand that c22,000 students studying at more than 20 universities are affected.

The group of universities stand firmly with their students and are actively communicating with those affected. The institutions are providing support where possible, but say urgent action is needed to prevent lasting harm and call upon the government to revoke this action immediately and work with the sector to deliver a fair and sustainable solution.

Statements from the Vice-Chancellor's of three of the universities involved, including:

Professor Georgina Andrews, Bath Spa University:

“The DfE and SLC state they want to prioritise the needs of students, but their actions have punished those who are the most vulnerable in our society who are trying to better their lives through education. It is indefensible that individuals are suffering for what is clearly a systemic failure by the SLC. Universities have been acting in good faith, following guidance provided by the SLC over several years.

“This change in the definition of distance learning to include Weekend Learning undermines the government’s own ambitions to expand flexible learning opportunities and ensure learners have a real choice in how they build their skills and qualifications and contribute to the economy and society over time.”

Professor James Knowles, Southampton Solent University:

“Universities have faced a prolonged period of inconsistent and unclear advice from the Student Loans Company, creating significant uncertainty for institutions and students alike.

“The decision to block access to student finance, announced with minimal notice, is the latest and most concerning example of this approach and is unjust in its impact on students who are already navigating complex personal and financial circumstances.

“This action runs counter to the government’s stated ambition of supporting flexible education routes that reflect the realities of modern learners’ lives. At a time when the UK urgently needs to upskill and reskill its workforce, restricting access to finance risks undermining opportunities for individuals and dampening progress towards national economic goals.”

Professor Julie Hall, London Metropolitan University:

"We are seriously concerned that the Government is repeating the patterns seen in other high profile administrative issues where system failures have devastated individuals. Students have been stripped of support overnight and told to repay loans that were previously approved and processed.

"This action by the Student Loans Company hits students from underrepresented and lower income backgrounds the hardest. These individuals rely on this funding to meet basic living costs in the capital. Removing it so abruptly mid-semester risks forcing many to abandon their studies, undermining years of progress in widening participation and fair access to higher education.

"We call on the Department for Education to resolve the inconsistencies in their guidance regarding in person teaching. Students should not be forced into financial crisis because of technical reclassifications and a lack of joined up thinking between different government systems. They must not be penalised for regulatory shifts that are entirely outside of their control."

Notes

*The ‘formal legal letter’ is a Pre-Action Protocol (PAP) letter; the first step a party should take before issuing an application for judicial review. It sets out the detail of the legal dispute and gives the government and SLC the opportunity to settle the matter without the cost and publicity of court action.