Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > General Actuarial
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Browse Open Actuarial Jobs

Life  Health  Casualty  Pension  Entry Level  All Jobs  Salaries


General Actuarial Non-Specific Actuarial Topics - Before posting a thread, please browse over our other sections to see if there is a better fit, such as Careers - Employment, Actuarial Science Universities Forum or any of our other 100+ forums.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:21 PM
Dr. Claw's Avatar
Dr. Claw Dr. Claw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 110
Default

On the surface, it sounds to me that the complainant is butt-hurt about failing a couple exams. Trying to create drama where none exists. If I had taken this approach, i'd have become a fellow damn quick.

Reminds me of the last time, years ago, a UK actuary came on here writing letters and trying to get everyone on board to some cause.
__________________
I'll get you next time, Gadget!!
  #62  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:23 PM
whoanonstop's Avatar
whoanonstop whoanonstop is online now
Member
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Studying for Spark / Scala
College: College of William and Mary
Favorite beer: Orange Juice
Posts: 5,812
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by almost_there View Post
One fails an exam if marks fall short of the pass marks. If there are no marks... then what, think about it
0 marks < number of marks needed to pass

In most scenarios, at least.

-Riley
__________________
  #63  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:25 PM
GargoyleWaiting's Avatar
GargoyleWaiting GargoyleWaiting is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Favorite beer: the closest one
Posts: 6,563
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by almost_there View Post
Disclosing marks is a legal requirement under section 7 of the Data Protection Act.
See. This is the sort of thing that needs expansion. Under whose interpretation of the DPA are exam results legally required to be disclosed?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFActuary View Post
But the mosquitoes in New Brunswick Bay of Fundy did mess with my understanding of some limited loss functions
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the North View Post
Excel gave me #VALUE.

Edit: Nevermind, I was linking a sumif and didn't open the linked spreadsheet. It is now giving me #N/A.
  #64  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:26 PM
almost_there almost_there is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 115
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GargoyleWaiting View Post
See. This is the sort of thing that needs expansion. Under whose interpretation of the DPA are exam results legally required to be disclosed?
Information Commissioner's Office. Will that do for you?
  #65  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:28 PM
Enough Exams Already Enough Exams Already is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,471
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by almost_there View Post
Are you stating IFoA didn't have marks for anyone for that exam- where's your evidence of that please.
I'm stating that the complainant doesn't show that a marks analysis is available to anyone who sat and failed the SA2 exam. And that's a pretty major assumption underlying the complaint's argument--that a marks analysis is available to exam takers who fail.

Whether someone marked the exam isn't really relevant here; the exam could have been marked, but exam taker may not be entitled to the marks themselves, nor to an analysis of the marks that leads to the failing score. If that's the case, the IFoA would have nothing to send him/her with respect to a marks analysis.

And If no one can get an analysis for their failed SA2 exam script, then the complainant hasn't been denied anything that anyone else would be entitled to. It's understandably frustrating, but not unfair or unjust.

Just because a marks analysis is available for the CA3 exam, that doesn't mean that one is available for the SA2.

The complainant needs to argue that such an analysis is normally available to candidates who fail the SA2 exam. No such argument is in the complaint, as far as I can see, nor is there any evidence that such a thing is available for the SA2.

I think we can all understand his frustration--most exam takers have failed an exam or two without knowing how or why. But that doesn't mean he's got a legal cause of action. Hopefully "abuse of process" and "vexatious litigation" aren't things in the UK like they are in the US. But from what you've presented, it sounds like he's got a judicial spanking in the works.
__________________
"Allow me to introduce you to the American public.
You'll want to wash your hands afterward."
--Samantha

"I guess I just have a lower prior-expectation of humanity than you folks. You win for optimism, but I win for accuracy."
--Pseudolus

"I wonder if there's a lower bound on how dumb the internet can get. We gotta be getting close, right?"
--Mother of DragQueens

Last edited by Enough Exams Already; 06-21-2018 at 12:30 PM.. Reason: spelling error
  #66  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:29 PM
GargoyleWaiting's Avatar
GargoyleWaiting GargoyleWaiting is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Favorite beer: the closest one
Posts: 6,563
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by almost_there View Post
Information Commissioner's Office. Will that do for you?
link?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFActuary View Post
But the mosquitoes in New Brunswick Bay of Fundy did mess with my understanding of some limited loss functions
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the North View Post
Excel gave me #VALUE.

Edit: Nevermind, I was linking a sumif and didn't open the linked spreadsheet. It is now giving me #N/A.
  #67  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:30 PM
almost_there almost_there is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 115
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Enough Exams Already View Post
I'm stating that the complainant doesn't show that a marks analysis is available to anyone who sat and failed the SA2 exam. And that's a pretty major assumption underlying the complaint's argument--that a marks analysis is available to exam takers who fail.

Whether someone marked the exam isn't really relevant here; the exam could have been marked, but exam taker may not be entitled to the marks themselves, nor to an analysis of the marks that leads to the failing score. If that's the case, the IFoA would have nothing to send him/her with respect to a marks analysis.

And If no one can get an analysis for their failed SA2 exam script, then the complainant hasn't been denied anything that anyone else would be entitled to. It's understandably frustrating, but not unfair or unjust.

Just because a marks analysis is available for the CA3 exam, that doesn't mean that one is available for the SA2.

The complainant needs to argue that such an analysis is normally available to candidates who fail the SA2 exam. No such argument is in the complaint, as far as I can see, nor is there any evidence that such a thing is available for the SA2.

I think we can all understand his frustration--most exam takers have failed an exam or two without knowing how or why. But that doesn't mea he's got a legal cause of action. Hopefully "abuse of process" and "vexatious litigation" aren't things in the UK like they are in the US. But from what you've presented, it sounds like he's got a judicial spanking in the works.
Section 7 of Data Protection Act is the answer to all that. You should educate yourself more on the Law before accusing people of being vexatious.
  #68  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:32 PM
almost_there almost_there is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 115
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GargoyleWaiting View Post
link?
Ever heard of google?
  #69  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:33 PM
GargoyleWaiting's Avatar
GargoyleWaiting GargoyleWaiting is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Favorite beer: the closest one
Posts: 6,563
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by almost_there View Post
Ever heard of google?
Right. I'm out. If you've no intention on helping anyone understand the issue then you're just trolling.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFActuary View Post
But the mosquitoes in New Brunswick Bay of Fundy did mess with my understanding of some limited loss functions
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the North View Post
Excel gave me #VALUE.

Edit: Nevermind, I was linking a sumif and didn't open the linked spreadsheet. It is now giving me #N/A.
  #70  
Old 06-21-2018, 12:35 PM
almost_there almost_there is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 115
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GargoyleWaiting View Post
Right. I'm out. If you've no intention on helping anyone understand the issue then you're just trolling.
I thought actuaries would be capable of googling...
Closed Thread

Tags
acted, britain, ehrc, ifoa, racism, victimisation

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.25603 seconds with 9 queries