The
Cardiff law
School

Attention of Mr Chris Maguire
The General Council of the Bar
2/3 Cursitor Street
London EC4A INE
Dear Sir, 4 th March 2002
I write to you because I wish to lodge a complaint against Cardiff University in the way that I have been treated and dealt
with during my time as a BVC student.
I embarked upon education as a mature student and completed a Bachelor of Laws with a 2:2 Honours from a London
Institute. A year or so before completing the degree I decided that 1 would like to read for the Bar. This particular interest
came from within our family and from the days, in particular, when I was told of how my grandfather qualified as a barrister
at the turn of the last century.
So with this thought in mind I applied through the application system and was made an offer by Cardiff University. In the
summer of 1999 I moved to Cardiff and began the course at the beginning of the academic year. The course staff
consisted of the Director of Professional Studies, Professor Miers (who retired at the end of that academic year); Ms
Angela Devereux, Course Leader; Mr Gareth George, Senior Lecturer responsible for civil litigation and various other
skills; Ms Sara Owen responsible for a group of skills on the course; Ms Jetsun Lebasci and Mr Gwyn Parry. Both of these
remaining lecturers were responsible for skills on the course. I started the year amongst other students and worked
alongside the same during the year. In around April some provisional results had been released for some of the
assessments that we had sat. I noted that I had not done as well as expected and during the feedback sessions looked at
the script to note that a lot of what had been written seemed not to make much sense to me. This made me quite
suspicious.
I returned to London to visit my sister and during my time in London while watching TV I came across a programme about
people with disabilities. During the running of the programme I recall a fellow sitting an exam as it appeared he seemed to
be struggling the same way that I did. This led me to even further suspicions and, when I returned to Cardiff, I decided to
investigate this further. I researched as to whether there was any way in which I could confirm whether a disability existed
and found the university had a special needs unit which was led by Ms Kate Dresser, the Unit’s facilitator.
I by appointment visited her so that she could carry out a battery of computer tests which would help to determine if I had
a disability. Having set these tests for a number of hours, the results were that I was mildly dyslexic.
I was asked to return after a few days to collect a return report which I would need to submit to my departmental head. A
few days later I returned to collect the report and noticed that Ms Dresser had written “that the disability had not been
detected or supported”. I sent the same form for the attention of the Course Leader, Ms Devereux.
Having done this it was brought to my knowledge that a doctor’s report would be required confirming that a disability
“actually” existed. The two individuals that I was in contact with seemed to differ. I was at a loss, so I contacted the Bar
Council and spoke to Ms Dickenson and, upon the advice given to me, decided that the report should be submitted, and
contacted the facilitator to make the necessary arrangements with the educational psychologist. Initially Ms Dresser gave
me a whole host of excuses as to why the university could not fund the cost of a psychologist. After debate I thought it
would just be easier to pay for the report myself and after further discussion she made arrangements for the psychologist
to examine me. I arrived at the agreed day and asked to see the psychologist. I was told that he had been delayed but
could see me after a short while. I returned to be examined by the psychologist and his examination took me through a
series of practical tasks and tests which would enable him to determine whether a disability existed. His conclusion was
that, as suspected, I was mildly dyslexic.
When I left the room I enquired as to when the second report confirming the disability would be produced. This was
important because I was told that the disability would only be confirmed by the production of this report. Initially I was told
by the doctor that, due to his other commitments, he would be unable to produce the report for quite a while. I insisted that
it was important that the report be produced as soon as possible, which I would then need to submit to my departmental
head. Having cleared this up with a doctor I asked him as to his fee. He confirmed that this was £100 which I paid by
cheque. I asked both the facilitator and the doctor whom the cheque should be made payable to. Both he and the
facilitator seemed nervous and after some discussion both were of the mind that the cheque should be made payable to
Cardiff University.
I returned to my studies and once the year had come to an end, I packed my bags and returned to London. After a month
or so I was contacted by Ms Kate Dresser who stated that the report was ready for submission. The report I was told
consisted of two parts: Part A which was a confirmation that the disability existed and Part B which was for my own
information. I was informed that Part A would need to be sent to my head of department and Part B was only for my own
records.
The facilitator enquired who was above the Course Leader. I responded by saying that this was the Director. At the time I
remember thinking to myself that this seemed to be a little odd. Later Part B was sent to me. Having received Part B I read
the contents briefly and noted that under the heading ‘Reason for Referral’, the doctor had stated that I had former
knowledge of the existence of the disability.
Having spotted this inaccuracy, I wrote to the doctor care of Ms Kate Dresser, informing him that this information was
inaccurate and could easily by confirmed by me producing information from my former school. Therefore the paragraph
should amended accordingly. I received a single amended page. I assume this was from the doctor and noted that the
paragraph had been amended. A month or so later I received my results and noted two things. First, that tassesthat I had
passed all seemed to be between 50% to 55% and that the remainder of seven modules seemed to be marginal failures.
The accompanying letter stated I had two choices, the first to sit the remaining seven using a short route, which basically
meant that I had to prepare and sit all seven in the summer of that year (2000 June to September), or the second
choicwould need to be spread the remaining seven over the following academic year 2000 lo 2001. I was lost as to what I
should do so I ViSited the Law School and spoke to my lecturers. Initially the Course Leader suggested it would be better
to sit all seven now. I did not know what to do but I thought that this would probably be the better route, but still had my
reservations. Having left the Course Leader, I met Mr George in passing who enquired as to my results and suggested
that it would be difficult for a student of even an ‘A’ class to clear such a number of modules and that I should take note of
the sun shining and how pleasant the weather was.
I did not take much note of these comments as I had work to do in preparation and one last task to do and that was to
drop off a form for the examinations at the administrator’s office.
Whilst doing this and due to the fact that both offices were combined I had an opportunity to speak to the Director of
Studies, Professor Miers, who spoke to me briefly stating that he apologised for not being able to do more for me and that
I would likely find that the remainder of my marks were in the region of 50-52%, “putting me in the same place as if .. had
not occurred”. Later that day, I overheard a conversation between Mr George and Ms Lebasci. I overheard Mr George say
to Ms Lebasci that “he has decided to take the short route which means we need to get him through the Bar course”
I left shortly after this and went back to my hall of residence and started to revise. I sat all seven modules and shortly after
returned to London. Results were released a month or so after my return. I was shocked to find that I had another four
resits to sit. I could not understand what to do.
I drove to Cardiff, spoke to the Course Leader and was told to take a couple of months off and then “get back into it”. This I
found odd because now I was situated in London and I did not have the facilities of lectures or tutorials, no colleagues
upon whom to call for my academic assistance, no up-to-date materials – in short being placed in an impossible situation
and finally with the need to go to Cardiff at the relevant dates to sit the outstanding modules.
I took it upon myself to hire a private tutor for tutorial support, purchased new materials on civil litigation and tried to obtain
some access in the local library which gave me a chance to prepare. I began to revise for these four modules in October
I being based in London now prepared for the modules and attended Cardiff at the relevant dates. The last of the
four modules was the Criminal option. My assessor was the Course Leader. The time for this assessment was scheduled
to take place 20 minutes before the lunch break. I arrived on time, delivered my submissions and shortly after this the
Course Leader made some comments. I was told how well I looked in my suit and I was asked where I was staying. I
responded by stating that I was in residence. The Course Leader responded by saying I am sure you will be around for a
couple of days and enquired as to whether I knew where her house was. I responded by informing her that I needed to
return to London.
She did not look best pleased and I left shortly after this. Having returned to London I waited for my results which arrived
after a few weeks. I found that I had apparently failed two assessments again. This letter was signed by the Course
Leader.
My father was appalled and annoyed at the way I was being treated and as a result during a time shortly after the above
results had been released suffered a severe stroke which took him into hospital .
I informed the university of the current situation regarding my father and shortly after informing them of this. I decided to
drive to Cardiff to speak to my lecturers in person. I was greeted by Mr George who did not seem pleased to see me. He
walked me up to his room were all the staff had their offices. I explained the situation to him and he said. “You should only
stop studying if your father dies.” I was annoyed at these comments but did not respond knowing what would possibly
happen.
I left Cardiff and returned to London being placed in a difficult situation of studying during the day and being at my father’s
bedside in the afternoon. During this period my father suffered a second stroke and passed away. I enquired as to what I
should do. Taking this situation into account I was told to sit the examination now. I did this whilst making the relevant
arrangements for my father’s funeral.
1 was sent a letter by Ms Jetsun Lebasci which ended with wishing me good luck with my remaining re-assessments.
Shortly after this I sat the remainder of the two modules for the last and final time and returned to London shortly
afterwards. After a few weeks I was sent a letter by the administrator informing me of the graduation ceremony and this
letter went into considerable detail about the venue for the ceremony. Towards the end of the letter, it asked me that, if I
were to pass, would I consider attending the ceremony and further if 1 did intend to attend I would need to send the
enclosed form by return to the administrator. I sent the form as required.
A few weeks later my results were released for the final time and I found that I had apparently failed Civil Litigation again.
The covering letter was signed by the Course Leader. Having received the results for the final time in October 2001 and
taking my personal situation into account, I had to deal with practical matters which had been put off during the revision
period and, having completed these matters, took my father’s ashes overseas to put them to rest. I have just returned a
little while ago and now write to you.
I have taken losses, in the first year with all the back-and-forth the second year, my losses are in thousands because all of
these studies have been privately funded by either bank loans or other type of credit which will need to be paid back within
a certain period of time-as you can imagine these figures would probably reach in the figures of around £20-£30,000.
I am bewildered as to what is going on, is the university only considered but maintaining its reputation and trying to keep
me quiet in the process, or do they not give a damn about somebody that has a disability and all the problems thereof.
I note-that you deal with education and training and would be grateful therefore if you could look-into the matter.
Yours Faithfully