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 be 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 the assessments that 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