Our Commitment on Reviews & Public Criticism

Last updated: 10 September 2026

We will never take legal action against anyone for honestly criticising us. Not a student, not a former student, not a parent, not a competitor, not a journalist, not an anonymous account on the internet. If you paid us and it was not worth it, say so publicly. We would rather read it than silence it.

What we are promising, specifically

• We will not sue you, and we will not threaten to. No civil defamation suit, no criminal defamation complaint, and no lawyer’s notice, over a review or public criticism of our courses, our faculty, our pricing or this company.
• We will not send takedown notices to Google, to a review site, to a social platform or to an app store to have criticism of us removed.
• We will not put a non-disparagement or gag clause in any enrolment agreement, refund, settlement or scholarship — and if you find such a clause anywhere in our paperwork, tell us and we will strike it out.
• We will not make a refund, a certificate, a recording, a reference or continued access conditional on deleting, editing or not writing a review.
• We will not have you identified, contacted at work, or approached through anyone else to pressure you into withdrawing something you wrote.

This applies to criticism that is unfair, one-sided, or simply wrong, as much as to criticism that lands. A promise that only covers reviews we agree with is not a promise.

What we will do instead

Reply, in public, under our own name. If a review states a fact we think is mistaken, we will say what we think actually happened and let a reader decide. If it is a complaint we can fix, we will fix it and say we did. That is the entire toolkit we intend to use.

The narrow limits of this

Three things this commitment does not cover, stated narrowly on purpose:

• Impersonation and fabrication — a review written in the name of a real student by someone else, or an account inventing a first-hand experience of a cohort it was never in. That is not criticism; it is a lie about who is speaking.
• Content unlawful for reasons unconnected with criticising us — threats, the personal data of another student, or material identifying someone the law protects.
• Our own legal obligations — if a court orders us to do something, we will comply with the court.

Even in those cases our first step is to ask the person or the platform, not to litigate; and we will say publicly that we did it and why. “It was defamatory” is not a route back into this list — that is precisely the argument this page exists to give up.

The other half of it: we will not fake reviews either

• We do not pay for reviews, offer a discount or a gift in exchange for one, or write them ourselves under a student’s name.
• If someone connected with us posts a review, they will say so in it.
• We do not selectively solicit reviews from students we expect to be happy while avoiding the ones we expect to be unhappy.
• We do not delete, hide or reorder critical reviews on any surface we control.

Holding us to it

This is a public, unilateral commitment, made deliberately so that it can be quoted back at us. If we ever act against it, say so in public, and send it to the Grievance Officer through the Grievance page. We will answer on the record.

Reviewed by counsel: pending. This text was drafted in-house on 10 September 2026 and has not yet been reviewed by an advocate. It states what we actually do and we stand behind it; it has not had a professional legal review.