Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for sharing your comments. We are committed to addressing student concerns, but it is also important to correct several factual inaccuracies in your review so that readers are not misled.
1. Programme format and advertising
The University has never advertised or offered an online MD programme. The Individualised Study Plan (ISP) is a temporary academic accommodation designed for students facing exceptional circumstances (for example, serious medical issues or delays in obtaining a student visa) that prevent them from immediately attending campus but who require a short extension before relocating. It has never been an alternative “online pathway” or a substitute for the campus-based MD programme.
The core programme structure, including the requirement for on-campus study, was detailed in official offer letters and published on our website. Any promotional material produced by third parties is required to follow the University’s official documentation. Where inconsistencies arise, the University’s published programme structure always takes precedence.
The ISP is a very short-term support measure, and students are expected to transition to on-campus learning once their situation allows. This was clearly explained during enrolment. On-campus delivery is compulsory for the MD degree, and where a student has followed a temporary ISP accommodation, full in-person learning is required to complete all credits and meet the learning outcomes and clinical competencies expected in medical education.
2. Tuition Fees
Tuition fees remained exactly as published in offer letters and on the University’s website. No additional or hidden tuition fees were introduced. Personal decisions regarding relocation, accommodation, or travel costs remain the responsibility of the individual student.
3. Trustpilot verification of reviews
The University may request verification through Trustpilot to confirm that a reviewer is a genuine student or applicant. This is a standard and good-faith measure designed to protect the integrity of the platform for all users—students, prospective students, and the institution alike. It is not applied selectively to negative reviews, nor is it intended to “invalidate” legitimate concerns.
4. Contact from legal representatives
The University fully respects the right of students and former students to express their views. However, when public statements contain serious allegations that are factually incorrect and potentially defamatory, it is standard practice to seek legal advice. Any communication from legal representatives relates solely to demonstrably false or misleading claims, not to silence honest feedback.
5. Constructive resolution
We encourage any student with concerns to contact us directly through our official support channels so that we can review individual circumstances, provide clarification, and offer appropriate assistance. Public reviews are part of open dialogue, but they must be accurate and fair to avoid misinforming prospective students and the wider community.
We remain committed to transparency, regulatory compliance, and the well-being of our students.
Kind regards,