Denied grant on fees 'cos of previous part-time course

TrustNoOne

I was denied a grant on my fees due to the fact that I already hold a level 6 higher cert in construction science. I got this cert from 3 years of part time study and paying €5,400 myself for it.

Has anyone else been denied a grant from their VEC for this reason? I read the terms and conditions of the scheme and it specifically says that having a level 6 cert from a 2 year course disqualifies you, and nothing about a 3-year level 6 course doing so.

The Cork City VEC say it doesn't matter if it's 2 years or 3 years, and basically told me to piss off. They said the Dept. of Education and Skills confirmed the VEC are correct and to appeal to them if I want.

This is absolute bollox, they say they don't pay grants for part time course, yet they won't pay fees now because of it,

Anyone else experience this?

snubbleste

Leaving the insults aside,
You only get a grant if your studies are progressing up the education ladder.
You already hold a level 6, whether it took you 2 or 5 years to acheive it or however it was financed, therefore you won't get a grant for another level 6.
If you apply for a level 7, then all other things being equal you should be eligible for a grant.

TrustNoOne

snubbleste wrote: »

Leaving the insults aside,
You only get a grant if your studies are progressing up the education ladder.
You already hold a level 6, whether it took you 2 or 5 years to acheive it or however it was financed, therefore you won't get a grant for another level 6.
If you apply for a level 7, then all other things being equal you should be eligible for a grant.

Where are you getting your information? You would do well to arm yourself with the facts, and not some misinformed VEC leaflet.

Please take the time to read the following clauses from the document outling the THIRD LEVEL MAINTENANCE GRANTS SCHEME FOR TRAINEES, 2010

CLAUSE 1: DEFINITIONS

In this scheme:

"approved course" means Middle Level Technician (MLT) courses of one and two years duration leading to a qualification at Level 6 (Higher Certificate) and Higher Technical and Business Skills (HTBS) courses of three years duration and/or one year "Add-on" leading to a Level 7 (Ordinary Bachelor Degree) qualification;

Proves my previous studies was an unapproved course

CLAUSE 3: PERSONS TO WHOM THIS SCHEME APPLIES

3.1 This scheme applies to: those who require higher level initial education and training to enhance their employment prospects in line with the Government's sectoral employment priorities and who are entering approved Middle Level Technician (M.L.T) or Higher Technical and Business Skills (H.T.B.S.) courses for the first time in the 2010/11 academic year or mature candidates re-entering in order to complete such a course.

By never being on an approved course before, I prove this is the first time I have been on an approved course.

CLAUSE 9: CONTINUANCE OF GRANTS

9.4 A candidate who has completed a two year Middle Level Technician (M.L.T.) course is not eligible for a grant in respect of a further two year or three year Higher Technical/Business Skills (HTBS) course, irrespective of whether or not a grant was previously paid, but s/he may be eligible for a grant in respect of the third "add-on" year of a related Higher Technical/Business Skills (H.T.B.S.) course.

The only distinction made here is the duration, two years.

Sourced from: http://www.corkvec.ie/grants/documents/2010FINALTLTSCHEME.DOC

Now that you have been informed with clear and irrefutable facts, do you or do you not see my point?

TrustNoOne

snubbleste wrote: »

You already hold a level 6, whether it took you 2 or 5 years to acheive it or however it was financed

By that statement, I assume you believe tradesmen should also not recieve funding for the first 2 years, should they decide to go to college?

There are 2 on my course in reciept of grants, which they recieved no problem.

A trade is essentially a 4 year course, leading to level 6.

Long Term Louth

Which course did you apply for?

TrustNoOne

Long Term Louth wrote: »

Which course did you apply for?

A level 7 full-time in an IT, Applied Physics and Instrumentation

Long Term Louth

TrustNoOne wrote: »

A level 7 full-time in an IT, Applied Physics and Instrumentation

If the course is level 7 at a recognised college, and you have not had fees paid for your previous level 6 course, you probably should be entitled to have your fees paid. You could contact the provider of your level 6 course as these can confirm in writing if they have received any fees. The previous responder was right when they said if you are not taking a step up i.e. from level 5-6, 6-7, to 8 etc you will not get grant fees paid.

TrustNoOne

Long Term Louth wrote: »

If the course is level 7 at a recognised college, and you have not had fees paid for your previous level 6 course, you probably should be entitled to have your fees paid. You could contact the provider of your level 6 course as these can confirm in writing if they have received any fees. The previous responder was right when they said if you are not taking a step up i.e. from level 5-6, 6-7, to 8 etc you will not get grant fees paid.

Ok, so how come the electricians on my course, who hold level 6 fetac certs, are being funded up to level 6 and beyond on my course?

It's all right there in the document I posted

Long Term Louth

TrustNoOne wrote: »

Ok, so how come the electricians on my course, who hold level 6 fetac certs, are being funded up to level 6 and beyond on my course?

Didnt you say the course is level 7?

TrustNoOne

Long Term Louth wrote: »

Didnt you say the course is level 7?

You reach level 6 after 2 years, then 1 more year to level 7

Long Term Louth

This site may help,

http://www.studentfinance.ie/mp9379/my-chosen-full-time-course-is-in-a-university-institute-of-technology-or-other-higher-education-college-in-ireland/index.html

Long Term Louth

Course Code CR001 Is this your course, if it is then it is level 7, therfore you should be entitled to have the fees paid. I wonder did you definately put level 7 on your application, and put the correct name for the course. This can be a common mistake and it may be worth your while calling into the VEC to ensure. Your previous qualification of level 6 should have no bearing, as you are stepping up.

From you other post you are getting BTEA, you would not have unless you were deemed to be stepping up.

TrustNoOne

Long Term Louth wrote: »

Course Code CR001 Is this your course, if it is then it is level 7, therfore you should be entitled to have the fees paid. I wonder did you definately put level 7 on your application, and put the correct name for the course. This can be a common mistake and it may be worth your while calling into the VEC to ensure. Your previous qualification of level 6 should have no bearing, as you are stepping up.

The course I'm doing is referred as a level 6/7, if I decided to pull out after 2 years then I would recieve a level 6 cert. If I did all 3 years, I would get a level 7.

Someone who, for example, holds a level 6 in business studies from 2 years of study is not eligible for funding up to level 6 of a different course, but will recieve funding in the 3rd year of their new course.

Once again, my level 6 took 3 years. That is the main point I am disputing with the VEC. It is all there in the document

I appreciate your help, but I have been through the whole thing already with them. I'm just looking to find out if anyone else is in the same boat.

Long Term Louth wrote: »

From you other post you are getting BTEA, you would not have unless you were deemed to be stepping up.

No, the only thing the social require is that you apply for a course which is a higher level than your previous studies. Hence the reason I applied to do a level 7, and not a level 6, even though the 2 courses of study are completely unrelated. It would make very little sense to tell someone on the dole for 9 months that they are not able to start a new course, unrelated to any previous qualification, because they won't be supported for the first 2 years. That would just mean the person stays on the dole, defeating the whole point of the scheme.

TrustNoOne

TrustNoOne wrote: »

CLAUSE 9: CONTINUANCE OF GRANTS

9.4 A candidate who has completed a two year Middle Level Technician (M.L.T.) course is not eligible for a grant in respect of a further two year or three year Higher Technical/Business Skills (HTBS) course, irrespective of whether or not a grant was previously paid, but s/he may be eligible for a grant in respect of the third "add-on" year of a related Higher Technical/Business Skills (H.T.B.S.) course.

The only distinction made here is the duration, two years.

Sourced from: http://www.corkvec.ie/grants/documents/2010FINALTLTSCHEME.DOC

Now that you have been informed with clear and irrefutable facts, do you or do you not see my point?

I would interpret that as anyone who has the equivalent of a two year full time course won't be funded for a similar two years again.

Doing it over three years doesn't make it any different.
It is how I understood the grant system works.

TrustNoOne

Deleted User wrote: »

I would interpret that as anyone who has the equivalent of a two year full time course won't be funded for a similar two years again.

Doing it over three years doesn't make it any different.
It is how I understood the grant system works.

You should apply for a job at your local VEC, you'd fit right in.

Seriously, 2 is not 3. It wasn't a 2 year course that for some reason took me 3 years. It was a 3 year course, full stop. Nowhere does it say the word "equivalent". The reason we have documents like this is outline clearly the terms and conditions. If not, then what is the point having them?

paperclip2

TrustNoOne wrote: »

You should apply for a job at your local VEC, you'd fit right in.

Seriously, 2 is not 3. It wasn't a 2 year course that for some reason took me 3 years. It was a 3 year course, full stop. Nowhere does it say the word "equivalent". The reason we have documents like this is outline clearly the terms and conditions. If not, then what is the point having them?

I think the issue here is that the grants office regulations you are quoting deal with full-time courses only and don't take into account that part-time courses at the same level of qualification take longer to complete. On the basis of the level of qualification you achieved your course was a two year equivalent offered part-time, over three years. So you are still in the same boat as if you had taken the course on a 2 year full-time basis. This is why you are being denied the grant.

OP you could ring the DES dept. 'Financial Assistance for Further & Higher Education' in Tullamore. They would be able to give you the complete story. Tel: 057 9325317. Finian or David are quite helpful.

TrustNoOne

paperclip2 wrote: »

I think the issue here is that the grants office regulations you are quoting deal with full-time courses only and don't take into account that part-time courses at the same level of qualification take longer to complete. On the basis of the level of qualification you achieved your course was a two year equivalent offered part-time, over three years. So you are still in the same boat as if you had taken the course on a 2 year full-time basis. This is why you are being denied the grant.

OP you could ring the DES dept. 'Financial Assistance for Further & Higher Education' in Tullamore. They would be able to give you the complete story. Tel: 057 9325317. Finian or David are quite helpful.

Thanks anyway, I'm just going to go through the final appeal process to the Dept. of Ed. I know exactly what their reponse will be.

Where is the justice in denying a fella a grant due to having a qualification from a course that was ineligible for a grant in the first place?

They could just as easily accept that this is some kind of loophole, let me have it and then change the rules for next year. Some hope of that happening. They'd prefer to have me quit the course, put me back on the dole and save a few pennies in the short-term.

I can't believe nobody sees that this I might have a case. Any other country would follow written rules to the letter. Nah, here we have to put up with half thought out documents, that in the end mean nothing because they can be twisted anyway.