Exam access arrangements not provided

Short answer

Yes. If you had approved reasonable adjustments for an exam, such as extra time, rest breaks or a specified room, and those adjustments were not provided or were not provided properly, that is normally a valid ground for an academic appeal. In the language most universities and colleges use, a failure to deliver agreed adjustments is a form of procedural irregularity in the conduct of the assessment, and it may also be a breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010. Both routes can be relevant at the same time.

The two overlapping legal and procedural angles

There are two things going on, and it helps to keep them separate.

First, there is the internal academic appeal. Almost every university and college in England and Wales allows an appeal on the ground that there was a material irregularity or error in the assessment process that could have affected your result. Not receiving your agreed adjustments falls squarely within this. What you generally cannot do is appeal simply because you disagree with the academic judgement of the markers about the quality of your work. So your appeal needs to be framed as a process failure, not as a challenge to marking standards.

Second, there is the Equality Act 2010 dimension. If your adjustments were put in place because of a disability, including a long-term physical or mental health condition, dyslexia or other conditions that count as a disability under the Act, then the institution is under a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments so that you are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared with non-disabled students. Failing to deliver adjustments that had already been agreed is strong evidence of a breach of that duty. This matters because it strengthens your appeal and, if the internal process does not resolve things fairly, it can support a later complaint or claim.

What counts as a valid ground

The core point is that the adjustments were formally agreed and then not delivered. Typical examples that support an appeal include the invigilators not giving you the extra time you were entitled to, rest breaks not being offered or the clock not being paused for them, being placed in the main hall rather than the smaller or separate room specified in your support plan, or the room being noisy, disrupted or otherwise not as agreed.

It is usually much stronger if you can show three things: that the adjustment was officially approved in advance and recorded in a support plan, study needs agreement or similar document; that it was not delivered on the day; and that this could realistically have affected your performance. You do not have to prove that you would definitely have passed or achieved a higher mark. Most appeal policies only require you to show that the irregularity could have had a material effect on the outcome.

Where the outcome can turn on the facts

The strength of the appeal depends heavily on the detail, so it is worth being precise.

If the adjustment was fully approved and simply not provided, that is the strongest position. If, however, the adjustment had not yet been formally approved, or your paperwork was still being processed, the institution may argue there was no agreed adjustment to deliver. Some appeal policies specifically allow you to argue that adjustments were not put in place in a timely way, so delay in processing can itself be a ground, but you may need to show you applied and submitted evidence in reasonable time.

It also matters whether you raised the problem at the time. If you told the invigilator during the exam and it was noted, that is powerful contemporaneous evidence. If you said nothing on the day and only raised it after seeing a disappointing mark, the institution may question whether the problem really affected you, or may argue you should have flagged it. That does not defeat an appeal, because it is often unreasonable to expect a student mid-exam to police the invigilation, but you should be ready to explain why you could not or did not raise it then, for example that you did not realise the clock had not been extended, or that raising it would have used up even more of your limited time and energy.

Finally, the remedy you can realistically expect varies. Common outcomes include being allowed to sit the assessment again as a first attempt with no penalty and with the correct adjustments in place, having the affected result set aside, or in some cases an adjustment to the mark or a reconsideration by an exam board. Institutions will rarely simply increase a mark, because they cannot know what you would have scored; the usual remedy is a fresh, properly adjusted attempt.

Practical next steps

1. Read the specific appeals or academic appeals procedure for your institution. This is the governing document and the deadlines and grounds it sets out are what you must work within. The relevant policy is usually on the university or college website under academic appeals, assessment regulations or code of practice for assessment. Universities such as Sheffield, York St John and Reading, for example, all publish detailed policies of this kind, and they specifically recognise failure to deliver agreed adjustments as an issue.

2. Check the deadline immediately. Appeal windows are often short, commonly around ten to twenty working days from the publication of the result or ratified marks. Missing the deadline is one of the most common reasons appeals fail, so treat this as urgent. If you are already out of time, you can still submit but you will need to explain and evidence the reason for the delay.

3. Gather your evidence. Assemble the document that confirms your approved adjustments, such as your student support plan, learning support agreement or the confirmation email from the disability or inclusion service. Then set out clearly what actually happened on the day, including the exam date, room, times, and exactly which adjustment was missed. If you emailed anyone, complained to an invigilator, spoke to the disability service, or if there were witnesses among other students or staff, note all of this.

4. Draft the appeal as a process failure. State plainly that you had approved adjustments (name them), that they were not delivered (say exactly how), and that this placed you at a substantial disadvantage and could materially have affected your result. Ask for a specific remedy, such as sitting the assessment again as a first attempt with the correct adjustments and no cap on the mark.

5. Consider raising the Equality Act point expressly if the adjustments related to a disability. You can note that the failure to provide agreed adjustments engages the institution’s duty to make reasonable adjustments and that you expect this to be taken into account.

6. Use the internal stages in order. Most institutions have a first-stage decision and then a review stage. Exhaust these before going outside.

If the internal appeal does not resolve it

If you complete the internal process and are not satisfied, the institution should issue a Completion of Procedures letter. For most higher education students in England and Wales, you can then take the matter to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education, which is the independent ombudsman for student complaints and appeals. There is normally a twelve month time limit from the Completion of Procedures letter, and the OIA will look at whether the institution followed its own procedures and acted reasonably and fairly, including whether it complied with the Equality Act. The OIA cannot award a degree classification but can recommend remedies including a fresh attempt, a reconsideration, an apology or a financial payment.

Separately, because the underlying issue may involve failure to make reasonable adjustments for disability, there is potentially a claim under the Equality Act 2010 in the County Court against the education provider. This is a more formal, higher-risk route with its own strict time limit, generally six months from the act complained of, and it is usually sensible to pursue the internal appeal and the OIA first. The court route is normally a last resort where the institution refuses a fair remedy and the disadvantage was significant.

Key points to check for your situation

To give you a firmer view, the things that will most affect the outcome are: whether the adjustments were formally approved before the exam and you can prove it; exactly which adjustment failed and how; whether you raised it at the time or as soon as reasonably possible; how quickly you are acting against the appeal deadline; and whether the adjustment related to a disability, which brings in the Equality Act duty. If you can tell me which institution it is, whether the adjustments were formally approved, and what actually happened in the room, I can help you frame the appeal more precisely.