PSOW Individual Decisions

Mx M complained about a delay in the Student Loans Company responding to an appeal about a decision it had made. The Ombudsman cannot consider the issues relating to the appeal itself, as those issues fall outside of her jurisdiction (section 13(1)(b) of the Public Services Ombudsman (Wales) Act 2019). However, the Ombudsman found that there was a significant delay in Mx M receiving a response to the appeal (which was subsequently issued to Mx M after the complaint was submitted to the Ombudsman’s office). The Ombudsman said that the delay caused inconvenience to Mx M, and found that the appeal response offered no apology or explanation for the delay, causing further frustration to Mx M. The Ombudsman decided to settle the complaint without a formal investigation. The Ombudsman sought and gained the Student Loans Company’s agreement to apologise to Mx M and explain the reasons for the delay within 5 weeks.

Ms A complained about the service provided by the Student Loans Company in relation to her student funding. Specifically, she referred to her entitlement, as a part-time student, to a Special Support Grant, how an overpayment had been handled and childcare payments. Having made enquiries, the Ombudsman decided not to investigate the complaint, but asked SLC to undertake some further action instead to settle the complaint. The Ombudsman noted that Ms A had initially been incorrectly told that she was not entitled, as a part-time student, to receive a Special Support Grant. However, this was subsequently rectified and the grant awarded. On a more general level, there was a difference in the application forms for part-time and full-time students in relation to Special Support Grant information and there was no reason why this should be. The Ombudsman noted that Welsh Government and SLC had made arrangements to ensure that the forms were the same, but the changes required had not been put in place for the current academic year. This would happen in time for the 2024/25 academic year. In relation to the overpayment, the Ombudsman found evidence of maladministration due to a delay in properly explaining and rectifying the overpayment, despite this having been previously highlighted as part of the SLC complaints process. This delay had caused uncertainty for Ms A about the amount and how the overpayment was to be recovered. In recognition of this, SLC agreed to give a written apology to Ms A and to make an ex-gratia payment to her of £400. The Ombudsman found no evidence of maladministration in relation to the childcare payments.