I just found this, and it's quite interesting.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,2181202,00.html

Was I alone in thinking that being a 4th year PhD student in a UK university was somehow not normal?

Interesting. One of the unis round here (not mine) has decided that if you go beyond 4 years, it's an automatic fail.

This seems quite out of alignment with what I've been told - I'm being put under pressure to be finished within three years (even I though that would take a miracle ) and it's made out that even going into a fourth year, let alone going on past that, is not a good idea!!! Who to listen to?!?!?!

juno - that applies in my department (you can't go beyond the maximum registration period)

It's really weird how some unis differ from others - sends out very mixed messages to people. At my place up until 2004/5, if a PhD was funded we had 3 years funded, then a 4th writing up year. The fourth year was unfunded and we paid a nominal writing up fee to retain workspace, library membership etc. Extensions were granted after 4 years for "special circumstances"

Then the rules changed, and we were send an email saying that we would be automatically classed as full time students for a 4th year, no writing up fee. We thought it was a hoax - the uni giving us something for nothing?! However it was true, and was merely a statistical exercise for them to boost their research figures by including 4th yrs in their research student stats. A large number as so many exceeded 3 years.
cont'd...

But...
in line with what Juno and Sixkitten say, it has now become EXTREMELY hard to get an extension after 4 years. I have not known anyone receive a fail for going over. However, I do know people who have been disadvantaged by the new rules, including a close friend who has a chronic illness that has previously necessited her getting extensions to her registration. Her department is now trying to bully her into suspending her studies, and she is very upset by the sudden change in treatment of her case.

To me, it makes no sense to automatically fail someone for going over 4 years, especially if they are motivated and have good reasons for needing more time. It looks bad for the uni if nothing else. While it is important to get students through in a timely manner, it's also important to acknoweldge that PhDs AREN'T straightforward entities that can be contained like taught courses.

I understand there are new rules, but they do not make things any easier for the student.

It's all about the fees, new students etc. Universities are becoming corporations.

The UK system is competing with the US, where they still take 7, 8 or 9 years to finish.

Surely the new regulations have affected the quality of the Phds, especially in non-science fields, where ideas take years to develop.

interesting. at my department it is like this: funded 3 years, expected to finish in 4 years, fail if not finished after 6 years.

all the staff who advises us on how to successfully complete a PhD in 3-4 years have themselves taken 6-10 years to get there. they are basically always telling us "don't do it like i did". needless to say that our PhDs are going to be of a different type than their's were.