Hello everybody, I applied for an LLM in Intellectual Property Law at this two university of London. The problem is that since I didn't hear anything from Queen Mary until yesterday I accepted, by signing it, the offer of London Metropolitan. So I need to know whether is possible to withdraw my statement in order to attend Queen Mary courses which I think is a better chance ... is it?!
Please somebody help me!
olly

You should definitely do your best to go to Queen Mary. I think that withdrawing your acceptance from LondonMet isnt much of a problem, unless its linked with your visa but if I was you, Id run like hell to change it!!!

Really thank you! I needed advice...fortunately my acceptance at Londonmet isn't linked with visa so I guess I could easilly decline it. Is that bad London Met..? I didn't know it...

Quite apart from questions about the relative status of QM and London Met (and in my view QM is better, and particularly so for IP), London Met faces other problems due to clawback of public funds on the basis of some misunderstanding/mistake in the reporting of student completion figures. The story can be found on Times Higher, amongst other places no doubt:-
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=407666

Well that's interesting... I don't really have a clue... thank to you all guys, now I'm sure that QM is the best choice although I didn't take the Toefl yet..hope to achieve the requested score!

London Met (became London Met as a result of the merger between Uni of North London and London Guildhall) is arguably one of the worst unis in the UK and one of the lowest rated one. You will not see many English or people from the developed world there but it is popular with students from
developing countries because the entry requirements are quite lax. Most good students on
3-year BA programmes try to transfer out after the 1 year as upon graduation they struggle to find a job or to get accepted on a good master programme, qm is in a different league. Run!

There is also a possibility that the government will allow London Met to go bust.

... so definitely not a good choice for an LLM.

Unbelievable...where are all you from?! Because you are very well informed..I'm italian, anyway I will run to QM!!

UK

It's funny how people have their perceptions of Universities be founded largely on league rankings. Condemning london met because of its not being quoted on the league tables is preconceived and blinkered. For intellectual property law london met has a very sound set of law tutors. Till Mills is a redoutable scholar in intellectual property, so too is Yyonne Smyth an academic of enviable place in that area of legal knowledge. These persons are london met intellectual property law lecturers. London Met is nothing undervalued to Queen Mary in intellectual property law. In fact, london met might be better.

Nothing to do with rankings, I have actually done some evening IT and language classes for execs and have a good idea of teachers and students (some of whom attended the same classes). The teachers are OK because they concentrate on teaching, not research, I doubt they do much research but student quality is very poor. Most students belong to one of the two categories: people who did not have the grades to go elsewhere or unfortunate good students from Asia or Africa who did not know that it is not a particularly well regarded uni. These ones try to leave/transfer to another place after 1st or 2nd year. You will find it very hard to persude any large employer to employ you (even if you graduated with distinction) unless you have personal/family connections. Employers have a perception that London Met is not a good uni and it will be an overwhelming task for you to fight it

Choose Queen Mary and no doubt, I have been studing here for 3 weeks already and I am very happy with everything. Good teachers,good students, good accomodation, good library, good food, many different student societies.

I know a boy from Russia, who studied 1 year at Guildhall( now Metropolitan) and was very proud of it, he wrote a book about mergers and acquesitions of companies in Europe and put this information into a title page as an advertising. I think, that he is not a very clever man and qualified laywer.

It's funny how people have their perceptions of Universities be founded largely on league rankings. Condemning london met because of its not being quoted on the league tables is preconceived and blinkered. For intellectual property law london met has a very sound set of law tutors. Till Mills is a redoutable scholar in intellectual property, so too is Yyonne Smyth an academic of enviable place in that area of legal knowledge. These persons are london met intellectual property law lecturers. London Met is nothing undervalued to Queen Mary in intellectual property law. In fact, london met might be better.

''The true test of civilization is not the census, nor the size of the cities, nor the crops, but the quality of men that society turns out.'' (Ralph Waldo Emerson).

The Financial health of a university has entirely nothing to do with the substance of its lecturers or curriculum. That london met might be in financial turgidities has nothing to do with the quality of its intellectual property law tutors.

QMUL undoubtedly has top-notch Professors/Tutors in intellectual property, but then, that does not make it anything undervalued to london met in that area of knowledge.

Dear MoshModupe, your brilliant quotation tells the answer to the problem: the society (london met) does not turn out enough of quality citizens (aka students), at least in the eyes of recruiters. Then the problem becomes a circle-like. Poor quality students reduce the reputation of the uni, which, in turn, deter new good students and employers and encourage weaker applicants

QMUL is an 'A' tier Law School in UK with a world class reputation esp. in IP while I am not sure many outside UK may have even heard of London Metropolitan.

Hi,

Came accross this thread, and felt like I had to contribute, being a former London Metropolitan student, (graduated 09) and especially as 'Banking' seems to know alot about londonmet graduates and how (seemingly) terrible their prospects are.

I had a training contract secured before I started my third year at Londonmet (not through any family/friend connections) currently doing the LPC, and have just been accepted at Cambridge for the LLM starting this year.

and i'm not the only example of a student at londonmet whose fortunate enough to be in this position, many students I personally know have gone on to pretty amazing things, (a couple went onto the BCL) and many had training contracts secured by the end.

Yes, Londonmet has its shortcomings, i.e financial dificulties, low ranking etc, but in the end it comes down to that one thing that all uni's have in common.....

It all depends on how much the individual student puts into it.

It's funny how people have their perceptions of Universities be founded largely on league rankings. Condemning london met because of its not being quoted on the league tables is preconceived and blinkered. For intellectual property law london met has a very sound set of law tutors. Till Mills is a redoutable scholar in intellectual property, so too is Yyonne Smyth an academic of enviable place in that area of legal knowledge. These persons are london met intellectual property law lecturers. London Met is nothing undervalued to Queen Mary in intellectual property law. In fact, london met might be better.

As a London Met LLB graduate I can say that based on my experience with Tim Mills I would agree with the above.

Not only would I consider Tim Mills as an eminent expert in the field of IP law, but his knowledge evinces a very rounded legal knowledge of any peripheral issues that might be involved in IP matters. He really knows his stuff, without having to think too much and his legal knowledge in general is very up to date.

As to yvonne Smith I can't comment, as she never taught me, but based on the calibre of the academic staff at London Met I would expect her to be top notch as well.