Proposals for a new approach to consumer and student protection

Proposal 1: Introduce a new ongoing condition requiring providers to treat students fairly

23. Ongoing condition C1 requires each registered provider to ‘demonstrate that in developing and implementing its policies, procedures and terms and conditions it has given due regard to relevant guidance about how to comply with consumer protection law.’
24. We are proposing to replace ongoing condition C1 (Guidance on consumer protection law) with a new ongoing condition C6 that would require a provider to treat students fairly.²⁰
25. We welcome feedback on the draft condition and associated draft guidance, which is set out in Annex C. We intend, over time, to further develop our guidance to support providers to comply with the requirements of the proposed condition.

Why are we making this proposal?

Why we are proposing to introduce a new condition

26. As set out above (in the Executive summary and Introduction sections of this consultation), decisions about studying higher education are 'one-off' for most people, with choices entailing significant time, effort, and financial commitment, and changing courses being costly.
27. In addition, prospective students often have limited firsthand knowledge or experience of higher education and rely heavily on providers to provide good information. This information asymmetry contributes to a power imbalance between students and providers. This may be particularly stark for students who are the first in their family to study higher education, or who lack good quality advice and guidance.
28. We consider that students should have confidence that providers:

• say what they mean: they provide clear, accurate and honest information to support informed decisions
• mean what they say: they deliver the experience promised and act as expected to resolve issues when they arise.

29. Through our partnership with NTS, we refer providers to NTS where we have concerns about compliance with consumer protection law.²¹ Unfortunately, this work has highlighted that issues persist across the sector and current regulatory requirements have not been sufficient. For example, we have made referrals to NTS (and published the outcomes of these referrals) where information has been unclear and where contracts have allowed a wide discretion to make changes or contain overly broad clauses. These seek to exclude or limit liability for events that a provider considers are outside of its control.²²
30. We also know from recent research commissioned by the OfS, that a substantial number (40 per cent) of students do not have a confident grasp of their consumer rights and entitlements, limiting their ability to hold providers to account.²³ This suggests we need to take further action to drive improvement in this area.
31. We want students to know their rights and have confidence in holding providers to account when things go wrong. Ultimately, we think it is better for students if providers get things right from the outset. We think that strengthening our regulatory framework will help to achieve this. Through a new ongoing condition, we aim to support a proactive and ambitious ‘right first time’ approach to protecting students that encourages high standards across the sector. Getting things right first time means protecting students from significant harm and should reduce the need for students to pursue time-consuming and costly legal action to seek redress.
32. Under our ongoing condition of registration C2, we require registered providers to be members of and cooperate with the student complaints scheme run by the OIA. By aligning our approach to existing consumer protection law, continued regular engagement with the OIA and our shared commitment to fairness, we intend to ensure that our regimes are complementary.

Why we are proposing that the new condition should be framed around fairness

33. Many students do not explicitly describe or think of themselves as consumers, but they often emphasise ‘fairness’ and ‘honesty’ when they talk about unmet expectations.²⁴
34. It is right that students expect to be treated fairly. As stated above, there is an inherent power imbalance between students and providers, with students reliant on providers to exercise their discretion appropriately. In addition, these are long standing and high stakes relationships, with providers’ decisions having significant academic, financial and personal consequences for students. In this context, it is appropriate that students be protected by an overall obligation based around fairness. This is also consistent with the approaches of other regulators.²⁵
35. Our proposal for an absolute fairness obligation (combined with the principles discussed in Proposal 2 below) is aimed at engendering a cultural shift - where this is needed - such that a provider’s governing body and senior executive team are focused on whether the provider is being fair to students.
36. While fairness is a core principle in consumer protection law, a fairness obligation could be interpreted in many different ways. For this reason we are proposing to accompany the fairness obligation with fairness principles, as well as requirements. These proposals reflect, and build on, consumer protection law and our regulatory experience, and address sector-specific challenges. Through this approach, we aim to establish a clear and shared understanding of fairness in the higher education sector.

Detail of the proposal

37. The proposed new condition includes a requirement to treat students fairly, which would operate on a standalone basis. For the avoidance of doubt, complying with the overarching obligation to treat students fairly would include, but would not be limited to, compliance with the principles and requirements in Proposal 2.
38. As part of meeting the overarching fairness obligation, our initial view is that providers should also consider whether arrangements are fair to students overall, as well as to specific groups of students, and should assess the effect of these arrangements taken as a whole. We suggest that the overarching fairness obligation means that the fair treatment of students must be a core part of a provider’s culture, which is discussed and monitored by its senior executive team.
39. We propose to cooperate, where appropriate, with other relevant bodies and ensure that duplication is avoided where possible. In deciding whether to take regulatory action in relation to the proposed condition, we propose to consider whether another body (such as the OIA, CMA or NTS) is already taking (or intending to take) action in relation to a particular matter and the type of action underway or planned.

Alternative options considered

40. We have considered alternative options to this proposal, which are set out in Annex B. These are to:

• retain existing ongoing condition C1
• only require compliance with consumer protection law (excluding any requirement to treat students fairly).

Notes

²⁰ We are also proposing that new ongoing condition C6 would replace ongoing condition C3 (Student protection plans). See Proposal 6 for further information.

²¹ Through our partnership with NTS, we refer providers to NTS where we have concerns about compliance with consumer protection law. NTS works with providers to address the concerns we have raised and others that they may identify. We publish the outcomes where providers have amended the terms and conditions in their student contracts that may be unfair or not comply with consumer protection law, for the benefit of providers and students. See OfS, ’Consumer protection for students’.

²² See ‘Consumer rights case studies’ at OfS, ‘Consumer protection for students’.

²³ OfS, ‘OfS explorations: Consumer rights’, 2025, paragraph 1

²⁴ OfS, ‘Defining our approach to student interest’, 2024.

²⁵ For example:

• the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) Consumer duty requires firms to deliver good outcomes and put consumer needs first
• Ofcom’s ‘Fairness for Consumers’ commitment ensures consumers are treated fairly throughout their relationship with providers
• The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) promotes choice, fair treatment and value for passengers
• Ofgem’s standards of conduct require energy suppliers to act fairly, honestly, appropriately and professionally.