When a suspicion of deception arises, the first contact with the university often shapes what follows. The clarifying conversation or written hearing is the moment when you can set out your account before any decision is taken. This checklist shows what you should know, what you can prepare and which rights apply at this stage.
Kurz beantwortet: Before a decision on a suspicion of deception, the university must give you the opportunity to respond, in writing or in a conversation, according to the guideline of the University of Mainz (as of December 2025). The Mainz guideline sets no fixed deadline. The University of Marburg sets a period of 14 days for the response (network version 13 July 2026). Last updated: November 2026.
The most important points
- Before a decision, you are heard, in writing or in a conversation.
- The letter or conversation is documented in the examination file, and the decision follows afterwards.
- The Mainz guideline sets no concrete deadline, while the Marburg hearing provides for 14 days.
- According to the Administrative Court of Mainz, a missing hearing can constitute a procedural error.
- The guidelines reviewed do not regulate access to files, so ask the examinations office.
What happens in the first minutes of an exam?
According to the Mainz guideline, the invigilator speaks to the person concerned and secures evidence. Mobile phones must be returned after the exam. The incident is noted in the minutes. As a rule, the exam continues, and further deception must be prevented. These immediate measures are not yet a decision on the deception.
It matters that you stay calm in this situation and do not make statements without thinking. You can answer later, in peace and with documents. Make sure your name, the date and the time appear on the minutes, and ask for a copy if the university issues one.
Why is the hearing so important?
The Mainz guideline states that the opportunity to respond must be given. Only afterwards is a decision made on whether deception occurred. The hearing is therefore not a formality but the basis of the decision. The letter or conversation is also documented in the examination file, so it can be traced later.
The guideline also notes that, in the view of the Administrative Court of Mainz, a missing hearing can be a procedural error. That error can be corrected in the objection procedure. For you, this means that a missing hearing is a point you should raise.
Which two routes exist?
The guideline names two forms. The table shows what each form means and how you can prepare for it. Which route your university chooses is set out in its procedure. Ask if it is unclear.
| Form | What the guideline describes | What you should prepare |
|---|---|---|
| Letter | Account of the incident with the opportunity to respond | A factual answer, evidence, the date and deadline noted, a copy kept |
| Conversation | The facts are explained and the conversation is documented | A timeline of events, questions written down in advance, a short confirmation of the outcome afterwards |
In both cases, what you say is documented. Phrase your answer precisely and avoid guesses about other people.
Which deadlines apply?
The Mainz guideline sets no concrete deadline for the response. It does require that the decision be taken promptly, so that you suffer no disadvantage if the suspicion is rejected. The University of Marburg sets the deadline concretely: the examinations office asks students for a written response to the report, with a deadline of 14 days. This is an example from a single university.
Check every message for date and deadline immediately. If something is unclear, ask in writing whether an extension is possible. A reply without a deadline is not a free pass but a reason to ask.
What standard applies to the decision?
The Mainz guideline refers to the prima facie evidence principle. It suffices unless a plausible alternative explanation exists. A complete chain of proof is not required. The guideline also notes that applying this principle to AI-generated texts is disputed.
For your response, this means that a plausible alternative explanation can be decisive. If one exists, name it concretely and set out what supports it. Blanket denials without reasons rarely help.
Checklist before the conversation
- Note the date, the deadline and the contact person from the letter.
- Read the regulations and the procedure guideline of your university.
- Write a timeline of events with times while your memory is fresh.
- Secure documents that show your way of working, such as drafts, source lists and time-stamped files.
- Write your questions down in advance and ask for a copy of the minutes.
- Clarify in advance whether you may bring a companion, and ask in writing.
How you prepare the content matters. Start with the sequence of events as you remember it and separate facts from assessments. Versions of your files, research notes and your reference list help show how your work developed. Avoid speculation about other people’s motives.
Frequently asked questions
Must I hold a conversation?
Not necessarily. The guideline describes two routes, and the university selects the procedure. If you prefer to answer in writing, ask the examinations office whether that is possible. A conversation can help with complex matters.
May I bring a companion?
The Mainz guideline does not answer this question. Clarify it with the examinations office in advance and keep the answer in writing before you attend the appointment.
What if the suspicion is not confirmed?
According to the Mainz guideline, a new exam must then be offered promptly. The university must give you the chance to sit the exam, so that the incident does not remain a disadvantage for you.
Can I challenge the decision?
Yes, through the statement of legal remedy in the notice. The Mainz guideline names one month for an objection. Check the information in the specific notice, because what it states is decisive.
Is the incident stored permanently?
The Mainz guideline provides that the case is recorded and checked against earlier cases. How long data is kept is a question of data protection and of the regulations. Ask the examinations office about retention periods.
What to do now
- Document the course of events and secure documents before you respond.
- Check the date and deadline at once and ask in writing if anything is unclear.
- Prepare your response factually and ask for a record of the conversation.
- If you receive a notice, clarify the objection deadline and decide in time.
Related reading
- Hub on examination regulations: Understanding examination regulations
- Attempted deception in an exam: consequences for your grade
- Plagiarism suspicion: procedure and your rights
- AI deception: what the Kassel ruling means
- Avoiding plagiarism when writing (in German)
Sources: University of Mainz, guideline on dealing with deception, version 4 (as of December 2025); University of Marburg, procedure on plagiarism or deception suspicion (network version 13 July 2026).
Last updated: November 2026. This guide is general information, not individual advice.
