When Exceptions Become the Rule: UCL’s CAS Controversy and the Uneasy Balance of Power

By Greater Manchester Global

The relief among international students at University College London (UCL) this week is palpable. After days of uncertainty and anger, the UK Home Office granted UCL additional Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) allocations, reversing a situation that left hundreds of students facing deferrals, financial loss, and emotional turmoil.

But while the outcome feels like a happy ending, perhaps we should pause before celebrating too quickly.

Because if one of the UK’s most prestigious universities can simply request — and receive — extra CAS numbers after exceeding its limit, what does that say about fairness, accountability, and the balance of power in higher education?

A System of Exceptions

On the surface, UCL’s defence is understandable. Demand spiked unexpectedly. Planning models fell short. Mistakes were made. The Home Office intervened, students were reassured, and the institution even pledged £1,000 per affected applicant to fast-track visa processing.

Crisis managed — or so it seems.

Yet this episode exposes an uncomfortable truth: when elite universities stumble, the rules bend. Smaller institutions that overstep their CAS allocations would likely face harsher scrutiny, if not penalties. For them, there is no emergency hotline to the Home Office, no quick diplomatic fix.

So, the question becomes — are we seeing flexibility in the system, or preferential treatment for the powerful?

The Human Cost of Oversubscription

To UCL’s credit, it did apologise. Its communications acknowledge the stress and disruption faced by international students who had already invested heavily in a dream now deferred — at least temporarily.

But apologies can’t erase the reality that students are being treated like data points in institutional forecasting errors. Behind the “extraordinary surge in demand” lie young people who left jobs, families, and countries to study in London, only to be told their arrival was… inconvenient.

When universities rely on international tuition fees for survival — UCL’s own income is nearly 80% international — the line between education and export begins to blur. Students become financial lifelines, not learners.

Who Really Holds the Power?

Let’s not forget that this entire episode unfolded under the shadow of a proposed international student levy — a policy that could cost UCL up to £42 million in lost income.

It’s hard to ignore the irony: universities are punished for recruiting too many international students, then rescued when they overdo it. The Home Office appears both the enforcer and the saviour — tightening the spigot of visas with one hand while quietly refilling it with the other.

In the long run, such mixed signals breed confusion and mistrust. International students deserve transparency, not policy patchwork.

The Takeaway

Perhaps this story isn’t about UCL alone. It’s about a higher education system straining under contradictions — one that simultaneously courts global talent and cautions against “too many foreigners.”

In granting UCL more CAS numbers, the Home Office offered relief, but also revealed an uncomfortable truth: in UK higher education, rules bend most easily for those already at the top.

Devil’s advocate question:
Should we applaud UCL’s swift recovery — or worry about a precedent where institutional power outweighs regulatory fairness?