A creative arts university which unveiled a controversial new logo last month is to spend nearly £100,000 every year on branding and publicity it has emerged.

Undergraduates and graduates at Epsom’s University for the Creative Arts (UCA) protested last month after a new logo for the institution, designed by the company behind the famous Channel 4 logo, Spin, was introduced.

Students said they had no say over the change and likened it to Soviet propaganda, but UCA refused to reveal how much the company was paid for the rebranding, saying this was "commercially sensitive" information.

LAST MONTH: Like it or loathe it? University's new logo sparks student protest

But the full costs can now be revealed after a freedom of information (FOI) request was submitted to the university by Dr John Berry, from Epsom, after he read about the issue in the Epsom Guardian.

The ex-university lecturer said it was "incomprehensible" that UCA - which this week became the highest ranking specialist arts university in the Complete University Guide 2016 - had not conducted the project in-house but instead paid substantial sums to Spin.

Your Local Guardian:

The university's previous logo 

According to the FOI, the logo rebranding project cost £81,840.

But UCA will also be paying £97,335 as "recurring costs", every year, to fund the design and production of its prospectuses, "other design services and art work" and on "marketing collateral and merchandising".

No recurring costs will be paid to Spin to evolve and adapt the new logo, but the totals do not include the money the university plans to spend changing the signage at its campuses.

A spokesman said: "We need to invest in these materials every year to attract new students.

"Each year we contact a range of suppliers for quotes to ensure we are receiving best value for money - there is no commitment to place orders with Spin in the future."

The FOI asked UCA to explain why, as a creative arts institution, it used an external agency for the rebranding.

The university claimed staff and students would not have had the time to work on the process, which took several months to complete.

It added: "The decision is based on respect for the creative industries we are training our students to join.

"It’s important we understand the professionalism of branding and design agencies.

"This comes with no lack of respect for the extraordinary work produced by our students and staff but their future professional livelihoods depend upon the credibility and resilience of these creative companies."

But Dr Berry said he thought this was nonsense.

He added: "If they are supposed to be a university with an arts and design department, and if they can’t do something like this, what on earth are they teaching?

"This is of no benefit to the general public and of no benefit to the university."

What do you think? Leave a comment below.