1. Student Advice Centre
One student’s journey

2. Overview
Aim is to give a brief overview of what the Student Advice Centre does, by going through a case study.
Main areas of enquiry: course-related; housing; money…this student has been supported in all three areas:
mature student, ethnic minority student; dyslexic; living in council accommodation; 3 children (supporting 1 financially); separated from wife during course. Started his course in September 2011.

3. 2012 – Course issues May 2012 – first contacted SAC
School concerns had been raised about his professional conduct & he wanted to raise concerns about his treatment on placement
Wanted us to accompany him to a school-level meeting to discuss the school’s concerns at short notice
June 2012 – attended school-level Fitness to Practice investigation meeting
Referred to Fitness to Practice Committee
September 2012 – formal Fitness to Practice hearing held
Panel decided to terminate student’s course
Sept 2012 – SAC advised student he could submit Academic Appeal against the decision
Assisted student to submit an academic appeal

4. 2012/13 – Money & Housing Issues
June 2012 – University Financial Support Team referred student to Welfare Advisers
Student had approached them to see if they could provide any financial support
June – October 2013 – Went through stages of debt advice:
Explored the student’s situation, listing income and expenditure; drawing up financial statement
Dealt with urgent/priority issues (notice of seeking possession received; utility bills unpaid)
Listed creditors and dealt with non-priority debts (benefit overpayment; credit card debts; payday loans)
Listing & maximising income (NHS bursary suspended)
October 2013 – went quiet……

5. 2013 – Education issues continued….
February 2013 – formal Academic Appeal hearing held
Appeal upheld and panel decided there should be a new FtP investigation, due to procedural irregularities brought to their attention by student
March 2013 – new FtP investigation started
Supported student in preparing his case
July 2013 – formal FtP hearing held
Panel decided the allegations against the student were unproved, and overturned the decision for his course to be terminated.
October 2013 – student submitted a complaint with the support of the RCN, without the Education Adviser knowing about it. When this was rejected, he took his complaint to the OIA.

6. 2014/15 June 2014 – Received outcome from the OIA
His complaint outcome was ‘Not Justified’
Education case went quiet…
August 2014 – student contacted us again about his electricity being disconnected, further benefit overpayments AND problems with his NHS bursary (he’d completed the forms incorrectly and not provided the right proof) leading to him having no money.
Separated from his wife, which meant bursary and other finance affected.
Received another repossession notice from the council
Liaised with the council about getting this stopped, and helped student access University hardship fund to help negotiate on this

7. 2016 March 2016 – continued to assist student with financial concerns
No money to pay for petrol to go to placement and associated problems with NHS bursary travel costs; struggling to find work
Coming up with unusual money making schemes using his bursary funding, which we had to talk him out of
This support is continuing, although the student is being erratic in contact with us so only comes in when things are coming to a head
June 2016 – the University started another FtP investigation against the student regarding placement concerns
August FtP hearing held, but panel decided there was no case and the student was able to return to his studies.
School agreed to find him a new placement

8. What support have we provided?
Numerous appointments with student in SAC
Read through s, statements, debt paperwork etc. sent through from student
Knowledge of University policies and procedures – Fitness to Practice, Complaints, Academic Appeals
Knowledge of benefit regulations, student funding, housing law etc.
Liaison with school and academic services team
Prepared for & attended school meetings and formal hearings with student
Explore whole financial situation & followed established debt procedures
Contacted priority & non-priority creditors with offer to deal with debts
Liaised with Financial Support team about crisis funding; Benefits Agency about overpayment; Council about possession notice/rent arrears

9. What have the challenges been?
Had to deal with student’s behaviour on a number of occasions (anger, distress) etc.
Due to an incident on campus, Security had been called and advised him not to come onto UP– had to negotiate with Security to meet with student at Jubilee.
When student was waiting to hear back from the University, he fired off lots of s to various University staff – had to try and ‘manage’ this.
His written submissions were far to long, so we had to put a lot of work into editing these.
Student taking action without our support, and involving other people. In this case, we had to pick up the pieces of his complaint once RCN stopped supporting him.
Time spent attending University meetings and hearings with student – one meet took 3 hours
Student going ‘off the radar’ and not contacting us sooner when issues arose, which we could potentially have prevented i.e. second notice of seeking possession.

10. Are there any positives?
University signposted/referred student to the SAC for assistance with both the education and financial issues he was having.
Students are signposted to the SAC in all official University letters and in University policies and procedures
Positive working relationship with University support services, such as Financial support team
The University commented a couple of times about our input
" The Chair expressed her thanks to Mr Ross for his balanced approach to this case in getting the student’s case across succinctly and accurately which had helped the panel in making their decision. “
“ The panel noted that in the previous hearing the student had been meandering and depressed. He had not been supported by the Students’ Union in the hearing and had not provided any further information to back up his case. In this hearing his evidence was much better presented. They believed the evidence to be genuine and should be relied upon. They noted that if it had been presented at the initial hearing, it was highly likely that the first panel would have concluded that the student’s fitness to practise was not impaired at that hearing.
Student is just about to start his final placement….watch this space!!