I think Durham has this weird reputation of the ‘Oxbridge near misses’ uni, but I do wonder about why this is because there are probably just as many students at places like UCL, LSE, Imperial, Bristol and Warwick who also applied to Oxbridge and were very borderline. I think Durham just has this particular reputation because it also has the collegiate system and is a another historic city?
Internationally, people have generally heard of LSE, UCL and Imperial, but not so much Durham, which was my only reason for putting for the London unis ahead of Durham.
Scottish degrees are 4 years long as standard (without a placement year) and many would see no point in taking 4 years to do what you could do in 3? Particularly, 4 years spent somewhere as remote and northerly as St Andrews is quite a lifestyle choice that would not be everyone’s cup of tea. On the other hand, you often hear it described as ‘magical.’
I think when it gets to UCL, LSE, Imperial Durham, Warwick, Edinburgh, St Andrews etc, most people just decide on whether they would want to be in a city, on a campus, location / how remote, etc. The ‘reputations’ are all pretty similar.
As for York - it seems people use it as an insurance choice because there is often a B in their conditional offers? Often Imperial, LSE, Durham, UCL or Warwick offers will be the same as Oxbridge with either all As or one (or two) A*s in there.
Bath offers less traditional, quite innovative courses with a focus in placement years and I think this is what distinguishes it to the extent it’s now frequently in the ‘top 10’ in league tables, ahead of most Russell Groups.