Skip to content
MedOffr
Fixed within 48 hours52 correctionsLast change 11 October 2026

Where we got it wrong.

A site that tells you where you stand has to be right, and when it isn’t, you should be able to see what changed. Every error that reached the live site is listed here once it is fixed, with what it said and what it says now, whether a reader reported it or we found it ourselves.

How this works

  • Report it with the page and, for a figure, a link to where the right one is published.
  • A confirmed error is fixed within 48 hours. If it needs a university to confirm something first, the page says so within the same 48 hours.
  • Then it is logged here, including errors we find ourselves. If you reported it, you can be credited by name, but only if you say so.
  • A school changing its own figures after they were compiled is an update, not an error. Those show up as the “confirmed as of” date on its page.
Report an error

  1. Found by MedOffr

    Med schools could leave the finder scrolled down

    What it said
    From inside the 3D view, Med schools in the navbar closed the 3D view, but on a busy phone or computer the finder could stay scrolled down where the 3D view had been opened, instead of going to the top.
    What it says now
    Med schools closes the 3D view and goes to the top of the finder every time.

    See it on:School finder

  2. Found by MedOffr

    The finder's cards could stay blank

    What it said
    On a first visit, choosing Cards (rather than the 3D view) could leave the list of schools empty until the page was reloaded, and switching back to the cards from the 3D view could do the same. The schools were there but never faded in.
    What it says now
    The cards show as soon as they are chosen, however you get to them.

    See it on:School finder

  3. Reported by a reader

    Two interview lengths were off

    What it said
    Brunel's recorded interview was given as about 45 minutes, and Barts' panel interview as about 20 to 30 minutes.
    What it says now
    Brunel says its six stations take about 40 minutes in all, and Queen Mary's FOI response puts its online panel at about 20 minutes.

    See it on:Brunel interviewBarts interview

  4. Found by MedOffr

    Edinburgh's latest figures were dated a year late

    What it said
    Edinburgh's school card and the Interviews page gave its latest rest-of-UK figures (521 applications, 237 interviews, 160 offers) as 2025 entry. Edinburgh labels them 2024/25, the students who started in September 2024, as its own page already said.
    What it says now
    They are given as 2024 entry, everywhere they appear.

    See it on:Edinburgh interviewSchool finder

  5. Reported by a reader

    Southampton's interview was listed as an MMI

    What it said
    The Interviews page listed Southampton's interview as an MMI, reading its selection day as a set of stations, and its school card called it a selection day, "not a classic MMI or panel". Glasgow's card said it was one of only four UK schools still using a panel.
    What it says now
    Southampton's interview is a panel interview with an observed group task, on one selection day, and it is listed and filtered as a panel. Glasgow's card says it is one of the few schools still interviewing by panel.

    See it on:InterviewsSouthampton

  6. Found by MedOffr

    UEA's SJT band was listed as not used

    What it said
    The SJT table listed UEA as not using the SJT band, so it counted UEA among the schools where a Band 2, 3 or 4 costs you nothing, while the same row said the SJT is folded into the interview score. Edinburgh's row left out that the band is 7.5% of its final ranking after the Assessment Day.
    What it says now
    UEA is listed as counting the band at interview, so a lower band can cost you there, and Edinburgh's row says the band counts in the final ranking as well as before the Assessment Day.

    See it on:UCAT scores, SJT band tabInterviews

  7. Found by MedOffr

    Converted UCAT figures piled up at the top and bottom of the scale

    What it said
    Old-scale totals above about 3,400 all converted to 2,700, the top of the new scale, and those under about 1,500 all to 960. King's highest 2024-cycle applicant, 3,510, read 2,700, and its lowest 2020-cycle applicant, 1,440, read 960; the converter on the UCAT page did the same, and converting back, 2,700 read only 3,470.
    What it says now
    Past the 99th percentile and below the 5th, where the curve is no guide, a score keeps its place between that point and the end of its scale: 3,510 reads 2,660, 1,440 reads 1,060, and only a perfect score reads 2,700. Every figure between the 5th and 99th percentiles, and every school's line and reading, is unchanged.

    See it on:King'sUCAT converter

  8. Found by MedOffr

    Old-scale readings were still labelled as a ratio range

    What it said
    The chart at the top of school pages without a published line labelled old-scale readings "converted from the old scale, as a range", a leftover from the flat-ratio conversion replaced on 4 October.
    What it says now
    It reads "converted from the old scale by percentile", which is how those readings have been worked out since.

    See it on:King'sBarts

  9. Found by MedOffr

    Imperial's line was said to have risen from 2,260

    What it said
    Imperial's 2026-entry cut-off was described as "up from 2,260 the cycle before", and its verdicts added "It rose sharply last cycle." 2,260 was not a figure Imperial published: it was its 2025-entry line, 3,020 out of 3,600, multiplied by 0.75.
    What it says now
    Imperial's 2025-entry line is given as Imperial published it, 3,020 out of 3,600. Among each year's candidates it sat at about the 95th percentile both years, so the line barely moved, and the claim that it rose sharply is gone.

    See it on:UCAT scoresImperial

  10. Found by MedOffr

    Old-scale UCAT figures were converted with a flat ratio

    What it said
    Figures out of 3,600 were converted to today's scale as a range between 0.71 and 0.75 times the score. Birmingham's median 2025-entry interviewee, 2,940, read as 2,090 to 2,210; King's average 2024 interviewee, 3,007, as 2,130 to 2,260; and Newcastle's international line, 2,980, as 2,120 to 2,240. A ratio misses that taking out a whole subtest changed the spread of totals, not just their size, so high figures came out too low.
    What it says now
    Every old-scale figure is carried by percentile on UCAT's decile table for its own year, to the same place on this year's test: Birmingham's 2,940 reads 2,270, King's 3,007 reads 2,350, and Newcastle's international line about 2,300 this year (2,270 on the 2025 test). The readings at King's, Barts, Birmingham, Nottingham, UEA, Plymouth, Aston and Lancashire, and Newcastle's for international applicants, moved with them.

    See it on:UCAT scoresSchool finder

  11. Found by MedOffr

    BSMS's logo was cut out badly

    What it said
    BSMS's logo, a green and blue helix on white, had its white background taken out by the site, which broke up the helix.
    What it says now
    It is shown as the school supplies it, on its own white square.

    See it on:School finderBrighton and Sussex (BSMS)

  12. Found by MedOffr

    Newcastle's UCAT reading was its old 2024 line

    What it said
    Newcastle's card gave its UCAT as "1,840 to 1,870" and read any score from 1,870 as competitive, whatever your GCSEs. That was its 2024 line on the old scale, converted. For 2025 entry Newcastle switched to points, where even eight grade 9s need a UCAT of about 1,900 to reach the 50-point interview line. It was also labelled UCAT-heavy, though GCSEs are 40 of its 100 points.
    What it says now
    Newcastle is read on its own points, the same sum as its page: your best eight GCSEs (up to 40) and your UCAT (up to 60) against the 50-point line, competitive from 5 over it. Without GCSEs, a UCAT reads possible from 1,900 (enough with eight grade 9s) and competitive from 2,060 (enough with eight 7s). It is labelled holistic. International applicants, whom Newcastle ranks on the UCAT alone, were also given the Home reading; they are now read against the 2,980 it interviewed them from for 2025 entry, on the old scale: about 2,120 to 2,240 on today's.

    See it on:School finderNewcastleUCAT scores

  13. Found by MedOffr

    Oxford read international applicants on everyone's figures

    What it said
    Applying as international, Oxford read the UCAT on everyone's figures, competitive from 2,400, though the 32 international applicants it shortlisted for 2026 entry averaged 2,537, against 2,377 for everyone shortlisted.
    What it says now
    For an international applicant our Oxford steps sit 160 higher, as far above everyone's as that average is: unlikely under 2,480, possible from 2,480, competitive from 2,560. The finder's combined GCSE and UCAT outlook reads it the same way.

    See it on:School finderUCAT scores, international

  14. Found by MedOffr

    Oxford's UCAT averages were read as a cut-off

    What it said
    Oxford's card gave its UCAT as "2,377 to 2,407" and any score under 2,380 read unlikely, so 2,360 was unlikely. Those are the averages of the applicants Oxford shortlisted and of its offer holders for 2026 entry, so many of those shortlisted scored under them. On the UCAT band pages Oxford's row read, for example, "Competitive from 2,377 to 2,407 · 27 under the low end at the bottom of the band, 13 over it at the top".
    What it says now
    Shortlisting is 50% UCAT and 50% GCSEs. From 2,320 a score reads possible: competitive with an excellent academic profile beside it. From 2,400 it reads competitive, and the profile need not be quite as exceptional. Under 2,320 it reads unlikely, because a lower UCAT needs an exceptional academic profile to stay competitive. The band pages give Oxford's averages and these steps, and every row says plainly where the band sits against a school's figure.

    See it on:School finderUCAT scores

  15. Found by MedOffr

    Imperial's international UCAT line was missing

    What it said
    For an international applicant, Imperial's card said it had published no international line, and read the UCAT against its 2,320 Home line.
    What it says now
    Imperial's international line for 2026 entry was 2,310. An international applicant's UCAT is now read against it, moved with the final deciles to about 2,340 for this cycle.

    See it on:School finderUCAT scores, international

  16. Found by MedOffr

    International cards called our working figures a published Home line

    What it said
    Applying as international, a school with no international line said it "published a figure for Home applicants only", quoting our working figure even at schools that publish no line, such as Cambridge's 2,250. Oxford's card said the same, though Oxford published the mean UCAT of the international applicants it shortlisted.
    What it says now
    Only a school that published a Home line says so. Oxford's card and the comparison show 2,537, the mean UCAT of the 32 international applicants it shortlisted for 2026 entry.

    See it on:School finder

  17. Found by MedOffr

    Two verdicts for international applicants used Home wording

    What it said
    Applying as international, a score between Imperial's 2,170 contextual line and its 2,320 line was told "It meets the 2,170 contextual line, which applies only if you are a contextual applicant", though contextual schemes are for Home applicants. Over Keele's 1,950 international minimum, the verdict said "Clears the 1,700 minimum published for 2027 entry", Keele's Home figure.
    What it says now
    An international applicant is never told about a contextual line. At Keele the verdict reads "Clears the 1,950 international minimum published for 2027 entry." The standings themselves did not change.

    See it on:School finder

  18. Found by MedOffr

    UCL's international UCAT line was missing

    What it said
    For an international applicant, UCL's card said it had published a figure for Home applicants only (2,190), and read an international applicant's UCAT against that Home line.
    What it says now
    UCL's international line for 2026 entry was 2,300. An international applicant's UCAT is now read against it, moved with the final deciles to about 2,330 for this cycle.

    See it on:School finder

  19. Found by MedOffr

    Glasgow's competition figures were from 2022, not 2025

    What it said
    Glasgow's card, its page and the comparison gave its 2025 entry competition for rest-of-UK applicants as 687 applications, 145 interviews and 93 offers: 21% interviewed and 64% of those offered. Those were its 2022 entry figures.
    What it says now
    Its 2025 entry figures: 491 rest-of-UK applications, 351 interviews and 123 offers, so 71% interviewed and 35% of those offered.

    See it on:School finderGlasgowUCAT cut-offs

  20. Found by MedOffr

    Imperial and UCL do not have close cut-offs

    What it said
    The suggested four and the check before you submit said Imperial and UCL “shortlist on the UCAT with cutoffs close together, so applying to both spends two choices on one bet”.
    What it says now
    Their lines are not close: Imperial's sits well above UCL's. The reason given now is that both are very competitive, so we suggest only one of them; with both on the form, two of your four choices would rest on two of the hardest shortlists.

    See it on:School finder

  21. Found by MedOffr

    Cambridge's offer rate after interview was too high

    What it said
    The Oxford or Cambridge advice and Cambridge's card said about 28% of those Cambridge interviews get an offer.
    What it says now
    Cambridge's 2026 figures, 318 offers from 1,800 applications, put it at about 21–24%, if it interviews 75–85% of applicants as we estimate; it publishes no interview counts for Medicine. Its card now shows the 2026 applications and offers.

    See it on:School finderCambridge

  22. Found by MedOffr

    Oxford's interview and offer rates were out of date

    What it said
    Oxford's card and the Oxford or Cambridge advice said Oxford interviews 20–25% of applicants and that about 45% of those interviewed get an offer. Those were our working figures from earlier cycles, and they did not fit together with Oxford's 173 offers from 1,164 applications.
    What it says now
    Oxford's own statistics for the 2026 cycle: of 1,156 applications, 1,026 were eligible, 41.4% of them (about 425) were shortlisted, and 175 got an offer, about 41% of those interviewed. The card, the advice and Oxford's page now use these.

    See it on:School finderOxford

  23. Found by MedOffr

    A resitter's suggested four ignored rules about which subjects were resat

    What it said
    The finder asked a resitter for three first-sitting grades but not which subjects they were resitting, so rules that depend on the subjects were never checked. Manchester, which expects its A*A*A in the resit exams, was suggested to applicants resitting one subject. Nottingham's A in Biology or Chemistry at the first sitting and its limit of two subjects, BSMS's single subject, and the A* Newcastle and UEA want in a resat subject were not checked either.
    What it says now
    You now tick the subjects you are resitting and give each one's first grade, and every school's rules are checked against them. A school is suggested only when all of its resit rules are met; a school whose rules depend on subjects you have not ticked waits until you do.

    See it on:School finderGap year and resits

  24. Found by MedOffr

    Cambridge was suggested on a high UCAT with few grade 9s

    What it said
    The suggested four could put Cambridge on the form as the aim-high choice for an applicant with as few as two grade 9s, once their UCAT reached 2,300, because a UCAT that high kept a Cambridge interview possible on our reading. Cambridge's UCAT was also shown as 2,150 to 2,300, a range set before the final 2026 deciles came out about 30 higher.
    What it says now
    Cambridge's UCAT is now read with your GCSEs: we would want about 2,200 with 10 or more grade 9s, 2,250 with 7 to 9, 2,350 with 5 or 6 (and 7 or more at 8 or 9), and 2,400 with fewer, with up to 50 under reading possible, and up to 150 under for a contextual applicant at a state school. Cambridge counts as a solid choice only from eight grade 9s, a 2,300 UCAT and A*A*A predicted. With fewer than five grade 9s, or where only a contextual case makes it possible, the finder says it is possible and suggests it only to someone who wants two aim-high choices.

    See it on:School finderCambridge

  25. Found by MedOffr

    A reading said the 60th to 70th percentile was the upper quarter

    What it said
    For schools that publish no UCAT figure, a score in the 7th or 8th decile read “sits in the upper quarter of the ranking”, though the 7th decile is the 60th to 70th percentile.
    What it says now
    It now says the score is well above the middle of the ranking, and names its percentiles. Deciles are now described the way UCAT names them, by their boundaries, always with the percentiles beside them.

    See it on:UCAT scoresSchool finder

  26. Found by MedOffr

    Bangor's subject rule, Lancashire's SJT rule and two UCAT labels were wrong

    What it said
    Bangor's offer read “Biology, plus one of Chemistry, Physics, Economics, Maths, Further Maths or Statistics”, so an applicant with Chemistry but not Biology was read as missing a required subject. Lancashire was listed as not using the SJT band, and its personal statement as scored before interview. Sunderland's and Kent and Medway's pages described their UCAT use as “Points by decile”.
    What it says now
    Bangor takes Biology or Chemistry, plus a second science, both at A. Lancashire rejects SJT Band 4, which its FOI response confirms, and the same response says the statement is not scored before interview; both are now read that way. Sunderland and Kent and Medway use the UCAT as a threshold, and their pages now give the decile that usually clears it.

    See it on:BangorLancashireSunderlandKent and MedwayUCAT scores

  27. Found by MedOffr

    Keele's and Edinburgh's contextual offers were not used

    What it said
    Keele's contextual offer was shown as “Lower grades” with no figure, and Edinburgh had none, so a contextual applicant at either was read against the standard offer.
    What it says now
    At Keele a contextual applicant is read against AAA (one grade under A*AA), with the extra shortlisting point noted; at Edinburgh a Plus Flag applicant is read against the AAB minimum entry requirement. Both are marked “if contextual”.

    See it on:KeeleEdinburghSchool finder

  28. Found by MedOffr

    Bristol's and City St George's contextual offers were missing

    What it said
    A contextual applicant was read against Bristol's standard AAA and City St George's standard offer, though both make ABB contextual offers for 2027 entry.
    What it says now
    A contextual applicant is read against ABB at both, marked “if contextual”: at Bristol with an A in Chemistry and a B in Biology, Physics, Mathematics or Further Mathematics; at City St George's two grades under the standard AAA, with its criteria (one of care, caring, refugee status or estrangement, or two of its school, area and free school meals measures).

    See it on:BristolCity St George'sSchool finder

  29. Reported by a reader

    Contextual applicants at UCL and Aston were read against the wrong offer

    What it said
    UCL's AAB contextual offer (Access UCL) was missing, so a contextual applicant predicted AAB read as impossible against A*AA. At Aston, the contextual AAB offer still asked for the standard offer's A* in Biology or Chemistry, so no contextual applicant could meet it. UCL's Access UCL criteria were also given as completing an access programme.
    What it says now
    A contextual applicant at UCL is read against AAB with Biology and Chemistry at A, and at Aston against AAB, both marked “if contextual”. UCL's criteria are its own for 2027: a UK state school and an IMD or TUNDRA quintile 1 postcode, free school meals, time in care or estrangement, with a link to check.

    See it on:UCLAstonSchool finder

  30. Found by MedOffr

    The lowest UCAT bands said who gets in from there on the wrong grounds

    What it said
    “No UK medical school has published a UCAT line this low … People do get in from unlikely positions, usually on a very strong academic record at a school where the UCAT counts for little.” With no school's standard line this low, a strong academic record does not get an application past the UCAT at any school.
    What it says now
    It says no school has published a line this low for a standard applicant, and that the students who get a place from these scores almost always have strong contextual circumstances (a flagged postcode or school, free school meals, time in care, an access programme), naming the schools whose contextual routes go lower, or saying that even those do not reach the lowest bands.

    See it on:UCAT scores

  31. Found by MedOffr

    Past a caution zone, the reason a score turned competitive did not make sense

    What it said
    On the UCAT band pages, Imperial read “From 2,380 in this band it becomes competitive. At or above the 2,320 competitive figure.”, though 2,350 is also above 2,320 and reads possible. Manchester and Bristol gave the same kind of reason past their caution zones.
    What it says now
    It gives the margin that makes the difference: “60 over the 2,320 cutoff for 2026 entry: past the 51-point margin a rise in the line could take away.” The verdicts themselves are unchanged.

    See it on:UCAT scoresSchool finder

  32. Found in a review of the site

    Four schools that use the statement at interview were labelled “Not used”

    What it said
    Imperial, Sheffield, Lancaster and Birmingham showed the personal statement as “Not used”. Imperial gives it to its Station 1 interviewers, Sheffield and Lancaster explore it at interview, and Birmingham reads it for commitment to medicine.
    What it says now
    Imperial, Sheffield and Lancaster read “Used at interview, not scored” and Birmingham “Read as part of the application”. “Not read” is now kept for the two schools that say so (Exeter and Sunderland), and “Not scored” covers the rest.

    See it on:ImperialSchool finder

  33. Found in a review of the site

    King's UCAT verdict contradicted its own lowest interviewee

    What it said
    Under 1,900 the finder said the score was “below anything this school's own figures show reaching an interview”, and the card called it “out of reach”, while the same card said King's once interviewed at about 1,580 to 1,670.
    What it says now
    It says under 1,900 is very unlikely without a contextual flag, that the lower interviewee was most likely a heavily contextual applicant, and that the 150-point score needs strength on every part.

    See it on:King's

  34. Found in a review of the site

    The resit table showed some resit offers as fixed grades, and put Cardiff in the wrong group

    What it said
    Leicester read “A*AA up from A*AA”. Newcastle, Liverpool, Lancaster and UEA showed a flat A*AA, though Newcastle raises the grade in each resat subject, Liverpool's and Lancaster's are typical examples and UEA wants an A* in the resat subject. Cardiff sat under “Do not accept resits” though its rule matches Leicester's.
    What it says now
    Each resit offer is given as the school states it, Leicester reads as its standard offer, and Cardiff sits with Leicester under “Only with extenuating circumstances”, since both only consider applicants who held their offer.

    See it on:Gap year

  35. Found in a review of the site

    The finder named 7 schools it does not cover; there are 15

    What it said
    “The newer schools (Kent & Medway, Lincoln, Chester, Edge Hill, Brunel, UCLan, Bangor) are not yet included.”
    What it says now
    All 15 are named: 10 newer schools, among them the University of Lancashire (formerly UCLan) and the University of Greater Manchester, 4 that only take graduates, and Buckingham, which is private.

    See it on:School finder

  36. Found in a review of the site

    The statement review was described as marking the way a medical school does

    What it said
    “Marks your personal statement the way a medical school does”, and on the pricing page “sentence-level marking”. Of the 34 schools here only Keele scores the statement at shortlisting.
    What it says now
    It marks the statement against the criteria medical schools publish, and marks the lines to fix and to keep. The science score is now academic exploration out of 5, taken from criterion F.

    See it on:HomeStatement reviewPricing

  37. Found in a review of the site

    The privacy policy and pricing page overstated a few things

    What it said
    The privacy policy said the finder used “no personal data at all” and that everything is deleted on request, and named no retention period for Anthropic. The pricing page said “No subscription” above a monthly plan shown as coming soon.
    What it says now
    The policy scopes the first claim to this site's own database, says payment records are kept as the law requires, gives Anthropic's 30-day retention, and asks for explicit consent for health and circumstances in a statement. Pricing says the credit packs are one-off payments.

    See it on:Privacy policyPricing

  38. Found by MedOffr

    Subject requirements were missing or only half-checked at 15 schools

    What it said
    The finder checked no subject requirement at King's, Manchester, Bristol, Birmingham, Barts and Keele. At Newcastle, Sheffield, Anglia Ruskin, BSMS, Cardiff, Dundee, Lancaster, Leicester and Sunderland it checked the first required science but not the second. Southampton's second sciences included Maths, which Southampton does not list, and Oxford, Cambridge and Edinburgh did not count Further Maths as the second subject.
    What it says now
    Every school's subject rule is checked in full, from its own 2027 entry requirements. A missing second science now shows as not meeting the offer, and each card lists the subjects that count.

    See it on:School finderSouthampton

  39. Found by MedOffr

    City St George's was listed under its old name

    What it said
    “St George's, University of London”, the name before it merged with City, University of London.
    What it says now
    “City St George's, University of London”, its name now, in the finder and on its data page.

    See it on:City St George'sSchool finder

  40. Found by MedOffr

    A required science predicted below A could still count as meeting the offer

    What it said
    With four A-levels, the finder judged grades on the best three. A*AA in Biology, Maths and Psychology plus a B in Chemistry showed as meeting A*AA offers that require Chemistry, although the Chemistry grade was the B.
    What it says now
    For offers of AAA or above, every required subject has to be predicted at A or above, and the finder says which one is not: “The A*AA offer needs Chemistry at A or above, and it is predicted B.”

    See it on:School finder

  41. Found by MedOffr

    An A* in any subject counted towards offers that need it in a science

    What it said
    Imperial, UCL and Aston want the A* in Biology or Chemistry, but the finder only counted grades. Predicted A*AA with the A* in another subject, such as Psychology, showed as meeting their A*AA offer.
    What it says now
    The finder now checks where the A* is for those three schools. With the A* in another subject, their grades read as Unlikely and say why: “The A*AA offer needs the A* in Biology or Chemistry, and none of your predicted A*s is in either.”

    See it on:School finder

  42. Found by MedOffr

    UCAT score pages gave four counts that added up to more than 34

    What it said
    Each score page showed, for example, “27 competitive · 3 possible · 4 out of reach · 14 read against no published line”. The 14 were already counted in the first three, so the four numbers summed to 48, and “out of reach” described schools the page itself rated only Unlikely.
    What it says now
    Three counts that add up to 34, the last labelled “unlikely or ruled out”, with the schools that publish no line given in a sentence underneath. The UCAT page's band list and the finder's introduction use the same words.

    See it on:UCAT scoresSchool finder

  43. Found by MedOffr

    Imperial's line was worded as a rule for next year

    What it said
    “Home applicants need at least 2,320 (confirmed for 2026)” on Imperial's card in the finder.
    What it says now
    “2,320 was the Home cut-off for 2026 entry, confirmed by Imperial”, in the past tense like every other school's line.

    See it on:School finder

  44. Found by MedOffr

    The privacy policy was out of date and did not name who is responsible for your data

    What it said
    It listed Stripe for card payments “once purchasing is switched on” after payments had gone live, and said only that one person was the data controller, without their name or address.
    What it says now
    It names the data controller and their postal address, describes payments as live, and lists every service that handles your data.

    See it on:Privacy

  45. Found by MedOffr

    The payment confirmation page said “Payment received” to anyone who opened it

    What it said
    Opening the page without having paid still showed “Payment received”. It granted nothing, but it said something untrue.
    What it says now
    It checks the specific purchase: credited, paid and on its way, or, for anything else, “Nothing to confirm here” with a link to the dashboard.

    See it on:Pricing

  46. Found by MedOffr

    The contact page said payments were not switched on

    What it said
    “Can I buy credits yet? Not yet — checkout is not switched on, so nothing can have been charged.” Card payments went live on 24 September 2026, so this was wrong from then on.
    What it says now
    The answer now says credit packs can be bought on the pricing page, and points to the refund rules in the terms.

    See it on:Contact

  47. Found in a review of the site

    A score far below last cycle's line was marked “Impossible”

    What it said
    A UCAT 100 or more under the line where a school's 2026 ranking stopped read “Impossible”, and so did any score under the floors read from Oxford's and King's own statistics. At 2,150, Imperial read “170 below the 2,320 confirmed cutoff: far too far to be shortlisted.” Those lines move every cycle, so none of that was a rule. Scores just under Edinburgh's published 2027 minimum of 1,850 read only “Unlikely”, when Edinburgh does not consider them at all.
    What it says now
    “Impossible” now comes only from a rule a school has published for the cycle: an SJT band it rejects, a minimum set in advance, a decile it will not consider, a missing A-level subject or a GCSE requirement. Under a past line reads “Unlikely”, with the gap and the kind of line stated, e.g. “170 below the 2,320 cutoff for 2026 entry.”

    See it on:School finderUCAT scores

  48. Found in a review of the site

    The homepage example said a score met a line it was under

    What it said
    The worked example for a UCAT of 2,150 read “Bristol · Possible — Meets the 2,240 cutoff only after it falls; inside the caution zone.” 2,150 is 90 under 2,240, the finder itself read it as Unlikely, and “only after it falls” was a prediction about next year's line.
    What it says now
    The example is now worked out by the finder's own rules, so it cannot say anything the finder would not. At 2,150 it shows Manchester competitive, Cambridge possible, Imperial unlikely, and Manchester impossible with SJT Band 3.

    See it on:Homepage

  49. Found in a review of the site

    The homepage's school counts did not add up

    What it said
    The homepage gave 16 confirmed lines in one place and “All 17 figures” in another, and said 16 schools had a line and 14 published no figure, which leaves 4 of the 34 unaccounted for. It also mentioned “19 score bands” without saying what they were.
    What it says now
    Every count comes from one grouping of the 34 schools: 16 with a confirmed line, 4 that publish statistics but no line (Oxford, Cambridge, Southampton and Newcastle) and 14 that publish no figure. The 17 figures are labelled as 17 figures from 16 schools, since Sheffield has two.

    See it on:Homepage

  50. Found in a review of the site

    The site claimed to cover every UK medical school

    What it said
    Pages said MedOffr read your grades against “every UK medical school” and covered “every standard-entry course”. It covers 34 schools, and some schools with standard-entry courses are not included yet.
    What it says now
    Pages now say 34 UK medical schools, without claiming that is all of them.

    See it on:HomepageSchool finder

  51. Found in a review of the site

    The statement reviewer was described as marking every sentence

    What it said
    “Every sentence is marked strong or weak with a reason.”
    What it says now
    The reviewer marks up to 12 lines to fix and 8 to keep, each with a reason, alongside a band and score for every criterion. The pages now say so.

    See it on:HomepagePricing

  52. Found by MedOffr

    The UCAT page described the bottom of the scale as one band

    What it said
    “Everything below 1,640, the lowest line any school publishes, is a single band.”
    What it says now
    It is two bands, split at 1,340, the lowest figure any school has published for any route, and the page now says so.

    See it on:UCAT scores

Seen something else that’s wrong? Tell us. It is the most useful message anyone can send.

↑ ↓ to move, Enter to go/ or ⌘K opens this anywheres on a school’s page shortlists it