The Significance Of Ashford Settlement

By Margaret Turner


In twenty fourteen, the great state of Iowa came into an agreement with Bridgepoint Education Incorporated and Ashford University. This deal was struck with the help of the office of the attorney general. The two institutions were charged with violating the consumer fraud act in terms of how they carried out all their recruitment process and the final enrollment terms. Both denied these allegations by refusing to acknowledge wrongdoing and liability on their part. Nevertheless, they still agreed on what is commonly referred to as the Ashford settlement.

The two were accused of the intentional withholding of key information required to make informed and good decisions by their students and using bad sales tactics to misrepresent their services. Additionally, they were found to have charged exceptionally high fees for every registration, which was subsequently never refunded. They were also found to have misled many people on several occasions during the online enrollment and registration.

Even after vehemently denying all the claims, the university agreed to come to a settlement deal to make the whole inquiry go away and prevent a nasty court case. They agreed to pay a total sum of over seven million dollars to the victimized individuals. This was specifically referring to the misleading tactics and techniques used by its recruiters. There was a three-year inquiry before the agreement.

The terms of the agreement were as follows. They are not to make misleading, false and deceptive statements, omit material intentionally that could have repercussions on the eventual decision of students or use unscrupulous methods of coercion in a bid to persuade students to enroll. These terms were to be followed to the letter.

The two institutions agreed to make any vital information that is required by students available to enable them make good decisions. They should also agree to adequately train all personnel they have employed, they are to take all necessary steps to make sure that their retention techniques are legal. They are also required to compensate third parties that were instrumental in their recruitment process.

A settlement administrator, Thomas J. Perrelli, was appointed to oversee how the process was being handled by the school. His work was to review the compliance of the school to the terms stipulated. He enjoys certain and privileges like listening in on recorded voice calls, look at complaints and review them, go through any records relevant to his investigation and talk to any employee or student both past an present. He effectively sees if the agreement is working and any successes it has had.

The Agreement has some provisions that allow the reimbursement of funds to students. The reimbursement will be processed and picked at the office of attorney General. The administrator lacks any powers and authority that allows him to authorize reimbursement as well as other payments. He has no involvement whatsoever in this matter.

Many different institutions like to take advantage of the increased number of people seeking education in the country. This is a sad fact because this industry is the backbone of the economy. The settlement reached is thus a win for the entire education system.




About the Author:



Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire