22,000 Weekend Students Told to Repay Maintenance Loans After Their Universities Classified Their Courses Wrongly
Their funding stopped mid-degree because a course was ticked as in-person when the regulations call weekend-only study distance learning. The High Court has now ruled the government was right
Key Takeaways
- Around 22,000 students on weekend-only degree courses in England had their maintenance loans and childcare grants stopped in March 2026, and were told the money they had already received was an overpayment. Their universities had registered the courses as in-person when the regulations treat weekend-only study as distance learning.
- The immediate clawback was dropped on 20 April 2026. Maintenance loans already paid are now repaid through the ordinary student finance system, so nothing is due until the borrower earns above their repayment threshold.
- On 16 July 2026 the Education Secretary went further and decided not to require repayment of the targeted grants at all, including childcare grants. That is a write-off, not a pause.
- Five universities took the government to the High Court and lost. On 10 August 2026 Mr Justice Johnson refused permission to claim judicial review on every ground, confirming that weekend-only courses are distance learning courses in law.
- Going forward there is no maintenance support for weekend-only study. A course now needs some in-person weekday teaching, normally at least once a week between Monday and Friday, to qualify. Tuition fee loans are unaffected throughout.
In this article
What Happened to 22,000 Students
In late March 2026, students partway through full-time degrees at a group of English universities opened letters telling them that the maintenance loan they had been living on was never theirs to have. The payment due at the start of the summer term did not arrive. The money already paid was reclassified as an overpayment, and the Student Loans Company was directed to recover it.
None of them had done anything wrong. Their universities had registered their courses on the SLC's Courses Management Service as in-person, or “in attendance”. The courses were taught in person — but only at weekends, and under the Education (Student Support) Regulations 2011 a course taught solely at weekends is a distance learning course. Distance learners get tuition fee loans. They do not get maintenance loans or childcare grants.
On 23 March 2026 the Permanent Secretary at the Department for Education wrote to 15 higher education providers setting out that decision. The Department estimates that around 22,000 students were on weekend-only courses in the 2025-26 academic year. A second tranche of providers came forward in June 2026, adding a further 5,700 students.
How much money was involved
Published figures differ, and it is worth being precise about which is which. The House of Commons Library briefing states that around 22,000 distance learners had incorrectly received up to £190 million in student finance payments in the current academic year. The High Court judgment records a Department for Education estimate that those students received around £330 million in grants and maintenance payments over the same year.
We have not found a published reconciliation of the two. Both are official estimates rather than audited totals, and the £330m figure is the one the court had in front of it.
These were not students who had chosen a soft option. The courses at issue require at least 24 weeks of term a year, 21 hours of study a week and at least six hours of in-person attendance each week — the same load as an equivalent weekday degree, compressed into Saturdays and Sundays. They were designed for people who could not study on weekdays: parents, carers and people in full-time work.
Where It Stands Now
Most coverage of this story stops at the government's April reprieve. The position has moved twice since then, and both moves matter more than the headline that got the attention.
Maintenance loans: repaid the normal way, not clawed back
On 20 April 2026 the Education Minister, Josh MacAlister, told the Commons that the SLC had been asked to collect any overpayments through normal student finance repayments. In practice that means the money sits on the loan balance and is repaid only through the usual income-contingent system. A Plan 5 borrower repays 9% of earnings above £25,000, and nothing at all below it. The SLC has confirmed that an overpayment of this kind adds no extra interest to the overall liability and does not affect a credit score.
Childcare and targeted grants: not repayable at all
In April, grant recovery was only paused “until at least September”, which left thousands of student parents waiting on a decision. That decision came on 16 July 2026, when the Secretary of State decided not to require repayment of grant payments made to students on weekend-only courses. Affected students are not required to repay those grants, whether they are still studying, have graduated or have left.
Future funding: the answer is still no
The reprieve was about money already paid. It did not restore eligibility. A student who stays on a weekend-only timetable gets no maintenance loan and no childcare grant from that point on. To qualify, a course must include in-person teaching on a weekday, normally at least once a week between Monday and Friday. Around 80% of affected students accepted an offer from their university to move onto a weekday timetable so their funding could resume.
The legal question is settled at first instance
The universities' challenge failed outright on 10 August 2026. The court did not merely dismiss the claim, it refused permission to bring it, holding that the argument was not even arguable. No appeal had been reported at the time of writing.
The short version: if you were caught by this, you are very unlikely to face a bill. The loan is repaid like any other student loan, the grants have been written off, and the practical loss is future maintenance support unless your course moved to a weekday pattern.
The Rule That Caught Them Out
A higher education course is either “in attendance” or “distance learning”. The distinction decides eligibility for maintenance support, and it turns on regulation 2(1) of the Education (Student Support) Regulations 2011.
The regulations say that the attendance requirement is not satisfied by attendance solely at weekends, solely in vacations, occasionally during the week, or only to sit examinations. All of those count as distance learning. What matters is how the course actually runs, not how it is advertised and not how many in-person hours are taught.
Why maintenance support is tied to weekdays
The Department's evidence to the court was that maintenance support is meant for students whose studies stop them taking standard full-time weekday employment, and that roughly 84% of full-time employees work weekday-only patterns. On that logic, someone studying only at weekends can still hold down a weekday job, so the living-cost rationale falls away.
There is one exception. A distance learning student who cannot attend in person because of a disability can still apply for a maintenance loan.
| Support | In attendance | Distance learning |
|---|---|---|
| Tuition fee loan | Yes | Yes |
| Maintenance loan | Yes | No, unless the student is disabled and cannot attend |
| Childcare grant | Yes, if eligible | No |
The sums at stake per student are large because maintenance is the bigger half of most student finance packages. For 2025/26 the maximum maintenance loan was £13,762 for students living away from home in London and £10,544 away from home outside London. Our student finance eligibility guide sets out the full test, including the course and attendance conditions that decide which loans you can have.
How It Unfolded
| Date | What happened |
|---|---|
| 2018 onwards | Universities begin offering weekend-only degrees, registering them as in-attendance courses |
| April 2024 | Public Accounts Committee reports that weak oversight of franchised provision left student finance open to fraud and abuse |
| July 2025 | SLC publishes new guidance on attendance |
| December 2025 | Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson writes to providers, flagging that weekend-only students are ineligible for maintenance loans |
| 23 March 2026 | DfE writes to 15 providers. SLC blocks maintenance loans and grants, and treats past payments as overpayments |
| April 2026 | Nine universities begin legal action. NUS launches a petition. The summer term payment does not arrive |
| 20 April 2026 | Immediate recovery dropped. Loans to be repaid through the normal system, grant recovery paused |
| 28 May 2026 | Five universities issue judicial review proceedings |
| 5 June 2026 | A second tranche of providers reports misclassified courses, adding 5,700 students |
| 16 July 2026 | Secretary of State decides not to require repayment of the grants at all |
| 28–29 July 2026 | High Court hears the claim on an expedited basis |
| 10 August 2026 | Permission to claim judicial review refused on all grounds |
The chain of events sits inside a wider problem with franchised higher education, where a registered university lets another organisation deliver its courses. The Public Accounts Committee had already found that insufficient oversight of franchised providers left the student finance system open to exploitation, and asked the DfE to spell out what attendance and meaningful engagement actually mean. The weekend-course episode is what happened when that question finally got a firm answer.
The High Court Ruling
Bath Spa University, Buckinghamshire New University, Leeds Trinity University, London Metropolitan University and Southampton Solent University brought judicial review proceedings against the Secretary of State for Education and the Student Loans Company. The National Union of Students, Universities UK and MillionPlus were interested parties. The case was heard on an expedited basis on 28 and 29 July 2026 and judgment was handed down on 10 August 2026.
The case
Bath Spa University & Ors v Secretary of State for Education & Anor [2026] EWHC 2129 (Admin), Mr Justice Johnson, 10 August 2026.
The universities ran four arguments: that the Secretary of State had misread the statutory definition, that they had a legitimate expectation their courses would be treated as in-attendance, that the definition was irrational if the Secretary of State was right, and that the SLC had been too slow to reinstate funding for students who transferred to weekday courses.
All four failed. On the central question the judge held that the meaning of the definition was clear and the universities' case was not arguable: the regulation expressly excludes weekend attendance from what counts as being in attendance. The legitimate expectation argument failed because neither the Department nor the SLC had ever made the clear, unqualified promise that such an expectation requires. The irrationality challenge was also years out of time, since the definition being attacked was made in 2011.
The part of the judgment students should read
Having refused the claim, the judge set out separately what had happened to the students. He recorded that none of it was their fault, that they had borne the brunt of the dispute, that many had relied on the apparent availability of loans and grants when making a significant life choice, and that many suffered considerable anxiety about having to repay money they could not repay.
He added that the students were not parties to the claim, that he was making no findings about any separate claims or complaints they might have, and that the rejection of the universities' grounds should not be treated as an endorsement of the way the students had been treated.
That last point is the one to hold on to. The ruling decided a question between universities and the government about how a regulation should be read. It did not decide whether anyone owes these students anything, and the judgment notes that there is separate litigation concerning the students themselves. Our roundup of student loan court cases and precedents tracks how borrowers have fared when challenging decisions of this kind.
What It Cost the Students
The clearest measure of the damage is not the headline total. It is what an individual was told they might owe, and what happened to people in the weeks before the government backed down.
The court accepted that many affected students sought medical support for anxiety, depression and panic attacks. Those who could not move to a weekday timetable faced a narrow set of options: stay on the course without maintenance support, or drop out and keep the debt already accrued. Some did drop out.
Restarting the money was itself a large operation. The SLC built a manual process to reinstate funding for roughly 19,000 cases, and at one point 16% of its staff were working on it. By the hearing the universities could point to 27 students still waiting; the SLC said nine of those had since been paid and the rest were being reviewed.
“These are working class students, many of whom are parents, who are using their weekends to gain a degree and invest in their futures. They should not be facing a funding cliff edge because of a mistake or being mis-sold their course.”
Amira Campbell, President of the National Union of Students
The Education Secretary, Bridget Phillipson, was equally clear about where the fault lay, saying this was not students' fault and that too many organisations had let their students down through either incompetence or abuse of the system. She called on providers to support students facing hardship as a result of the withdrawal of support.
If You Were Affected
Settled in your favour
- No immediate demand for the maintenance loan
- Targeted grants, including childcare grants, are not repayable
- No extra interest is added because of the overpayment
- No effect on your credit score
- Your tuition fee loan is unaffected
Still a problem
- No maintenance support while you stay on weekend-only study
- The overpaid maintenance still sits on your balance
- Transferring to weekdays may not be possible for everyone
- Students who dropped out keep the debt they built up
Check what your balance actually says
The reprieve moved the overpaid maintenance onto your ordinary loan balance rather than cancelling it, so it will show up in your online account. Confirm the figure, and confirm that no grant has been added back as repayable, since grants were written off in July 2026. If something looks wrong, raise it with the SLC in writing.
Work out what it means in monthly terms
A larger balance does not automatically mean larger repayments. Student loan repayments are set by income, not by the size of the debt. On Plan 5 you repay 9% of everything above £25,000 a year and nothing below it, and the balance is written off 40 years after the April you were due to start repaying. For many borrowers a bigger balance changes only how much is eventually written off.
Ask your university about hardship support
The Education Secretary asked providers to support students facing hardship because of the withdrawal of payments, and several of the affected universities set up dedicated schemes. If you lost a term's maintenance and had to find the money elsewhere, that is exactly what these funds are for.
Before you enrol on anything taught at weekends: ask the provider in writing whether the course is registered with the SLC as in attendance or as distance learning, and whether it includes in-person teaching between Monday and Friday. That single question is what this entire episode turned on. Our eligibility guide covers the rest of the test.
The Pattern This Fits
2026 has been the year in which the gap between what students were told about their loans and what the rules actually said became a political problem. In July the Treasury Committee concluded that the conduct of the Department for Education and the Student Loans Company amounted to mis-selling in three instances, and in September the Government response accepted that future applicants must be told plainly that loan terms can be changed by later governments.
The weekend-course episode is a different failure with the same shape. Nobody misled these students about interest rates or repayment thresholds. They were told, in effect, that a course came with maintenance support when in law it did not. The information that would have changed their decision existed, in a 2011 statutory instrument and in SLC guidance, and it did not reach the person signing up.
One important difference: the Treasury Committee noted that the government is legally exempt from ever being held liable for mis-selling student loans. Here, the party that made the error was the provider, not the government. That opens questions about provider liability that the High Court expressly declined to decide, and which the judgment notes are the subject of separate litigation. Treat any firm offering to reclaim money on your behalf with caution until that is resolved.
Sources
- House of Commons Library, Student finance and weekend-only courses, research briefing CBP-10828, 8 May 2026. commonslibrary.parliament.uk
- Bath Spa University & Ors v Secretary of State for Education & Anor [2026] EWHC 2129 (Admin), 10 August 2026. caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk
- MoneySavingExpert, “22,000 weekend students told to repay maintenance loans after courses wrongly classified”, 10 April 2026. moneysavingexpert.com
- MoneySavingExpert, “20,000 weekend students to repay living loans as normal after Government reprieve”, 21 April 2026. moneysavingexpert.com
- Wonkhe, “Weekend courses turn into weekday consequences — with students left holding the bill”, 27 March 2026. wonkhe.com
- Bath Spa University, “FAQs: weekend study and funding eligibility”, updated 10 August 2026, for the position on grant repayment and future eligibility. bathspa.ac.uk
- Browne Jacobson, “High Court ruling on weekend courses and student loans”, legal comment. brownejacobson.com
- GOV.UK, “Student finance: how you're assessed and paid”, for maintenance loan maximums. gov.uk
Frequently Asked Questions
Do I have to pay back the maintenance loan I was wrongly given?▼
Not as a lump sum. Since 20 April 2026 the Student Loans Company has been collecting these overpayments through normal student finance repayments, so the money sits on your loan balance and is repaid only when you earn above your repayment threshold. On Plan 5 that is 9% of everything above £25,000 a year, and nothing below it. The SLC has confirmed that the overpayment adds no additional interest to your overall liability and does not affect your credit score.
Do I have to repay my childcare grant?▼
No. Recovery was first paused in April 2026, and on 16 July 2026 the Secretary of State decided not to require repayment of grant payments made to students on weekend-only courses at all. That covers childcare grants and other targeted grants, and it applies whether you are still studying, have graduated or have left your course.
Why is a course taught in person at weekends called distance learning?▼
Because regulation 2(1) of the Education (Student Support) Regulations 2011 says the attendance requirement is not satisfied by attendance solely at weekends, solely in vacations, occasionally during the week, or only for examinations. The High Court confirmed this reading on 10 August 2026, holding that weekend attendance is expressly excluded from what counts as being in attendance, however much in-person teaching takes place. The policy rationale given to the court was that maintenance support targets students whose studies prevent standard weekday employment.
Can I get a maintenance loan for a weekend-only course now?▼
No. The April 2026 reprieve applied only to money already paid; it did not restore eligibility. A course needs in-person teaching on a weekday, normally at least once a week between Monday and Friday, to count as in attendance. Tuition fee loans remain available either way. The one exception to the distance learning rule is a student who cannot attend in person because of a disability, who can still apply for a maintenance loan.
How many students and how much money were involved?▼
The Department for Education estimates around 22,000 students were on weekend-only courses in 2025-26, across 15 providers written to in March 2026, with a further 5,700 students identified at a second group of providers in June. On the money, published figures differ: the House of Commons Library briefing gives up to £190 million for the academic year, while the High Court judgment records a DfE estimate of around £330 million in grants and maintenance payments. The judgment also records that, counting earlier academic years, some individual students would have owed as much as £74,000 had repayment been enforced.
Did the universities win their court case?▼
No. Bath Spa, Buckinghamshire New, Leeds Trinity, London Metropolitan and Southampton Solent were refused permission to claim judicial review on every ground on 10 August 2026. The judge did note separately that none of this was the students' fault, that he was making no findings about any separate claims the students might have, and that refusing the universities' case should not be read as endorsing how the students had been treated. No appeal had been reported at the time of writing.
Related Resources
Student Finance Eligibility
Which loans and grants you can get, and the course and attendance conditions that decide it
Treasury Committee: Loans Were Mis-Sold
MPs find three instances of mis-selling by the DfE and the SLC
The Government Response
What ministers agreed to change in September 2026, and what they refused
Court Cases and Precedents
How borrowers have fared challenging SLC and DfE decisions
Student Loan Calculator UK Editorial Team
Editorial Team
This page is maintained by the Student Loan Calculator UK editorial team, checked against GOV.UK and Student Loans Company guidance. Read more about our editorial approach.