SFE Assessing Eligibility Guidance 2013/14 - Practitioners - Student ...

2013/14 HE Student Finance
Assessing Eligibility Guidance
Commission of a serious criminal offence might also be grounds for
refusal in some circumstances, but SFE will need to consider such
cases carefully, especially where the applicant is pursuing higher
education as a means towards his rehabilitation. A student may
argue that he has already been punished adequately by his
sentence, but SFE should consider whether it is appropriate to
support a student whose conviction casts doubt on his suitability for
his intended career. (An obvious example is an offence against a
child by someone who is, or may be, preparing for a career working
with children.) It is important to bear in mind that the decision as to
whether a student is suitable for or should be allowed to take a
course rests with the institution; the decision as to whether the
student is eligible for funds rests with SFE.
23. SFE might also decide that a student is unfitted to receive support
where the student has made repeated applications for and received
support for a number of different courses without completing those
courses. This is most likely to involve loans for living costs and
targeted grants: Adult Dependants‟ Grant, Childcare Grant, Parents‟
Learning Allowance and DSAs, as entitlement for these loans and
grants is not subject to previous study rules, but could also involve
fee support.
24. If a student has already received support for four courses, SFE
should consider whether that student should be eligible for further
support. For example SFE might decide that a student who has
received support for four successive undergraduate courses and
withdrawn from each is unfitted to receive support for a fifth course.
There may be other similar cases where a student is unfitted for
further support. SFE should deal with each case on its own merits.
In the case of fee support, SFE should consider any additional years
of fee support awarded due to compelling personal reasons when
making their decision.
25. There might be other instances where SFE would wish to consult the
institution before exercising the power to refuse or terminate
eligibility, where the institution‟s evidence might put the student‟s
fitness to receive support into question. For example, the institution
might provide evidence of attempted fraud against it which has not
actually led to the student being expelled but which might lead SFE
to consider whether the student, though being allowed to continue
with the course, should continue to receive support for it.
26. The fact that a student is, or has in the past been, in dispute with
SFE over a student support issue should not of itself be a reason for
refusing or terminating support, even if the dispute was acrimonious.
It may be a different matter however if the student has behaved
criminally in pursuing his grievance, though the case should be
considered on its own merits.
27. It is important to remember that the purpose of these provisions is to
safeguard public funds, and to ensure that they are spent properly.
SFE should always ensure that a decision to refuse or terminate
support will stand up to examination in the event of a formal appeal
or a court challenge. It may be a sensible precaution to seek advice
from SFE‟s legal staff.
Version 1.8 10