Vlog

Students begin further Covid legal action after UCL case settled

Pre-action letters sent to 36 more universities over lost teaching during pandemic as long-running ‘test case’ resolved

Published on
February 16, 2026
Last updated
February 16, 2026
UCL Main Bulding
Source: iStock/Lillasam

A group representing university students affected by disruption to teaching during the Covid pandemic is planning to begin legal action against 36 more universities, having recently reached a settlement with UCL.

The London-based university confirmed on 13 February that it had agreed to settle with current and former students suing the institution over changes to teaching during the pandemic, but did not disclose how much it had paid out to claimants. Students involved in the case have previously called for compensation payments of £5,000 each.

The students alleged that the institution had breached its contract with them between 2018 and 2022 when classes were cancelled or moved online and access to facilities were restricted. 

In a statement, UCL said it admitted no liability but agreed to settle “so the matter could be resolved amicably and without further expense, which would have meant diverting valuable resources away from teaching, research, and supporting our students”.

Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

“We recognise that the Covid years were incredibly difficult for students,” said Michael Spence, UCL president and provost. 

“Throughout this period our priority was clear: to support students, protect their well-being, and maintain a high-quality academic experience in unprecedented circumstances.”

Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Over 170,000 other students are still pursuing legal action against 36 universities for changes to teaching during the pandemic through Student Group Claim – the group responsible for the UCL settlement.

The other institutions involved include the universities of Bristol, Manchester and Liverpool; Newcastle and Cardiff universities; and King’s College London and the London School of Economics.

Student Group Claim said it planned to move forward with action against the other institutions following the UCL case and had sent each of them a pre-action letter with information about the proposed claim.

Claims relating to the 2020-21 academic year, one of those worst affected by Covid, will begin to expire under the Limitation Act from September 2026. 

The group argues that fees for online courses are typically 25 to 50 per cent less than for in-person classes. 

Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

“Universities should have paid that difference in value to students as compensation during the pandemic, but without exception, despite students’ complaints, petitions and pleas, they refused to do so,” Student Group Claim wrote in a statement. 

Although there are typically clauses in standard university contracts that institutions claim entitle them to charge full fees even if they did not provide in-person teaching, the group argues this is a breach of the Consumer Rights Act.

If successful, the bill for universities could be significant at a time of existing financial strain for many. 

Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

“UK undergraduates at university during the pandemic borrowed money at ridiculous interest rates to fund courses which were ruined by online teaching and closed facilities,” said Shimon Goldwater, partner at Asserson solicitors, one of the firms representing the students involved in these cases, including those from UCL.  

“Student Group Claim is helping students challenge universities to do what they should have done during Covid: pay students compensation for not providing them with the in-person teaching for which they paid.”

Goldwater said he was “pleased” that his clients had reached a settlement with UCL. “Student Group Claim will now turn its attention to claimants who attended other universities during the pandemic.”

Spence added: “UCL has never disputed the principle that individuals may seek legal remedies. 

Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

“Throughout the pandemic we provided clear routes for students to seek redress, and many secured compensation through those established processes. This resolution enables us to focus on our core mission of delivering world-leading research and education."

helen.packer@timeshighereducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Related universities

Reader's comments (9)

new
Lawyers on a money grab. Many students were given massively inflated grades as a result of the Covid pandemic. I have never seen so much pandering to them with exceptions, generous marking etc etc. Some but not all lecturers worked their assess off for no extra pay.
new
Well yes I remember the additional workloads involved and how we had to convert all our classes into online formats very quickly with very little support or training. Everything was recorded which often made it much easier and more convenient for the student to access and was probably advantageous to them overall. I also find it rather irritating that while the students are complaining that they did not have the classes, actually attendance at seminars and seminar preparation was not great in any case before Covid. I suppose it's a bit like a gym membership. If you are paying the monthly subs then you expect all the personal trainers etc to be going through the motions etc even tho you sit at home on the sofa eating crisps and watching Tricia.
new
Yes quite correct. The point is the students did not get what they were promised. If I pay a builder to construct a new greenhouse for my garden that's what they have to do. It's up to me if I never do anything with it or chuck rocks trough the glass as that's what I paid for.
new
Good result for the UCL students who persevered with the claim, and did not follow the OIAHE route advocated by UCL, but not sure whether the legal argument based on consumer law was accepted. Of course, having argued for a standard university-student contract for 34 years, I hoped that the High Court would decide on exactly which terms of the UCL contract were unfair, and then perhaps the dream of 1992 would become reality. As all the 36 institutions will have developed contracts individually, maybe perhaps taking account of the standard terms developed by David Palfreyman and myself from 2006 onwards, it will be interesting to see what the outcome is in each case, if it ever sees the light of day. Dennis Farrington
new
"If successful, the bill for universities could be significant at a time of existing financial strain for many." Many of the Universities named have posted large defecits already. Given that our VCs are both visionary and prudent, will they have already allowed for this additional cost in their budgets for next year and in their financial strategies and costings? It looks like it will be a substantial cost, tho' on a one-off basis rather than cumulative. Borrowing money from the financial sector to pay compensation is not great and you will have to pay interest on the sums advanced.
new
Unis are not having much luck are they? There was that RAAC problem as well recently. That cost some a very pretty penny I can tell you!
new
Students didn't get the education and educational experience that they paid for so why should they foot the bill? The lawyers taking on their cases are pursuing their legitimate business to help clients pursue their rights and are doing so at no cost to the students, so they are the wrong target for criticism. Criticism should be directed at the government in power during Covid. Furlough supported many businesses to stay afloat by paying employees to stay at home doing no work. Higher education was excluded from this and so the cost was passed on to students. The students are right to pursue universities as that is where the contractual relationship sits. Universities are right to be unhappy but their target should be the State - they seem unlikely to succeed, but that doesn't excuse the students being the ones to be out of pocket. The grade inflation mentioned in these comments may compund the students' problems, if some employers see Covid period degrees as being of less value.
new
A university education is not just something you get, it's also something you do. An athlete who doesn't turn up for training can't sue his trainer if she doesn't make the grade, nor a musician who doesn't practice. Universities however haven't exactly helped by talking about 'learning outcomes' as objects to be 'delivered' like pizzas. You don't 'deliver' music to musicians or fitness to athletes, so why would you deliver learning to learners? It's ironic that they are now arguing that education is not a product, but only in order to avoid paying out.
new
A pity we will not get a High Court ruling on the shamefully vague and often egregiously one-sided U-S so-called ‘contract’ and also on the application of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 to the HE Industry flogging its ‘service’ to the student-consumer. But guess that is why UCL (and doubtless now the other 30+ Us) will have wanted to get a secret settlement. Perhaps eventually some 200,000 claimants getting (?) £500 on average (varying according to how many tuition years were Covid disrupted) means a damages cost to the Industry of say £100m? - and these same Us are also paying out compensation for Ss losing teaching because of industrial action by academics. That £500 is, of course, just a guess - but note the several settlements of similar claims at US Us seem to be in the region of 100-250 USD. See discussion of ‘The student as consumer’ in the (long!) chapter on ‘Thr Student Contract’ in Farrington & Palfreyman, The Law of Highere Education (Oxford University Press, 3rd edition, 2021 - a snip at £240 for 1000 fun-packed pages).

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT