Purpose of the procedure

This procedure confirms LPTC compliance with JCQ’s General Regulations for Approved Centres 2025-2026, section 5.8e “that the centre will draw to the attention of candidates and their parents/carers their written complaints and appeals procedure which will cover general complaints regarding the centre’s delivery or administration of a qualification and their internal appeals procedure.”

Grounds for complaint

A candidate (or their parent/carer) may make a complaint on the grounds below (this is not an exhaustive list), and some examples are given.

Practical Endorsement Sessions / Marking of NEA

• Non-subject specialist tutor without adequate training/subject matter expertise utilised on a long-term basis
• Tutor lacking knowledge of new specification/incorrect core content studied/taught
• Core content not adequately covered
• Inadequate feedback for a candidate following assessment(s)
• Pre-release/advance material/set task issued by the awarding body not provided on time to an exam candidate
• The taking of an assessment, which contributes to the final grade of the qualification, not conducted according to the JCQ/awarding body instructions
• The marking of an internal assessment, which contributes to the final grade of the qualification, not suitably monitored, instructed, or undertaken according to the requirements of the awarding body (complainant should refer to the centre’s internal appeals procedure to ascertain if an appeal is more suitable than this complaints procedure)
• Centre fails to adhere to its internal appeals procedure
• Candidate not informed of his/her centre assessed marks prior to marks being submitted to the awarding body where applicable
• Candidate not informed of his/her centre assessed marks in sufficient time to request/appeal a review of marking prior to marks being submitted to the awarding body where applicable

Access arrangements

• Candidate not assessed by the centre’s appointed assessor if a concern/referral has been appropriately made
• Candidate not involved in decisions made regarding his/her access arrangements
• Candidate not informed about their personal data being shared electronically
• Candidate not informed/adequately informed of the arrangements in place and the subjects or components of subjects where the arrangements would not apply
• Adapted equipment put in place failed during exam/assessment
• Approved access arrangement(s) not put in place at the time of an exam/assessment
• Appropriate arrangements not put in place at the time of an exam/assessment as a consequence of a temporary injury or impairment

Entries

• Candidate not entered for a required exam/assessment
• Candidate entered for a wrong exam/assessment

Conducting examinations

• Failure to provide adequate briefing for candidate on exam timetable/exam regulations prior to exam/assessment taking place (or provide an opportunity for candidate to attend a briefing session)
• Room in which exam held did not provide candidate with appropriate conditions for taking the exam
• Inadequate invigilation in exam room
• Failure to conduct exam according to the regulations
• Online system failed during (online) exam/assessment
• Persistent disruption during exam/assessment
• Alleged, suspected or actual malpractice incident not investigated/reported
• Eligible application for special consideration for a candidate not submitted/not submitted to timescale

Results and Post-results

• Before exams conclude, candidate not made aware of the arrangements for post-results services and the accessibility of senior members of centre staff after the publication of results
• Candidate not having access to a member of senior staff on the day of publication of results to discuss/make decision on the submission of an enquiry
• Candidate request for return of work after moderation and work not available/disposed of earlier than allowed in the regulations
• Centre applied for the wrong post-results service/for the wrong exam paper for a candidate
• Centre missed Awarding Body deadline to apply for a post-results service (for a reason other than a late request by the candidate) Centre applied for a post-results service for candidate without gaining required candidate consent/permission
• Candidate unhappy with a result (complainant to refer to Post Results Information)
• Candidate unhappy with a centre decision not to support an appeal against a Review of Results outcome or Review of Moderation request (complainant to refer to Internal Appeals Policy document and application form)

Complaints and appeals procedure

If a candidate has a general concern or complaint about the centre’s administration of a qualification they are following, LPTC encourages them to try to resolve this informally in the first instance. 

A concern or complaint should be made in person, by telephone or in writing to the Examinations Officer.

If a complaint fails to be resolved informally the candidate is then at liberty to make a formal complaint.

How to make a formal complaint

• A complaint should be submitted in writing to the SLT for Exams
• The SLT for Exams (or her representative if the SLT for Exams is not in centre) will respond to the candidate usually within 10 working days
• Forms received will be logged by the centre
• If the complainant is not satisfied with the SLT for Exams response, the complainant should write, within 10 working days of the SLT for Exams response, to the Head of Centre. The complaint should clearly identify the main issue(s) of concern and, if possible, indicate the nature of the resolution they are seeking.
• The Head of Centre will investigate the matter and will respond to the candidate within 15 working days of receiving the complaint. Written records will be kept of all complaints received, the steps taken to investigate the complaint and any action taken as a result. In particularly complex cases, the Head of Centre will advise candidates of any extra time needed to investigate properly.
• If a complaint is made to the Head of Centre before a formal complaint has been made to the SLT for Exams, the Head of Centre may refer the matter to the SLT for Exams for resolution.
• If candidates are still not satisfied with the decision, they are able to proceed to Stage 3 of the Complaints Procedure for those matters which are within the responsibilities of the centre. Where the complaint is against the decision of an external agency or third party, such as an examination board or higher education institution, candidates will be advised on the appropriate route for their complaint and, where possible, given information and advice about progressing their concerns.
• Stage 3 of the Complaint would be referral to the Management Board.