The UNV claims that disputes about academic judgement are not taken into account and since both examiners are "academic people" then there is no grounds for complain at all. And despite the facts of collusion they claim that there is no sufficient evidence for appeal or review of the case at any level. I was recommended not to contact the examiners directly and supervisor denied being the supervisor of the examination which doesn't make any sense. I am referring to Oxbridge.

I signed a written documentation, contract and agreement with the UNV, at the beginning. But the supervisory team had kept hidden a simultaneous grant with the same name where they were patenting all my results. I just found out at the end. Obviously this involves cooperation from other internal officials. This is why they failed my PhD, they had in order to claim my work is useless although they got plenty of money. The rest is just a "smoke screen".
But my question is how many people in UK finds in this kind of situation and if it is common currency in UK Higher Educational system for this to happen, in particular in the higher top range of UNVs. It is quite important issue with many collateral implications. My worry is the denial of the UNV because then who can trust UK educational system?

The Degree Committee first appointed an acting supervisor for the examination procedures, later denied it and finally "no comment". The internal report ("independent") was written by a previous supervisor (who had patented the results), proven by the literary fingerprint. Nobody explains who was in charge of selecting the examiners. And the whole academic history has been physically deleted. Can an oral examination happen without an appointed supervisor? The "independent reports" were not provided before the oral examination but later. It looks like they fooled everybody. But to us is quite serious offense to falsify an oral examination at UK Institution. Are there known cases where the documentation of a viva has been changed during the following days?

is it common to be given an outright failure on a first submission, after being evaluated on the first year with excellent mark, after more than 4 hours examination in the UK? Is it common at UK graduate education that examiners and supervisory team arrange for examination to fail (collusion)?