The Facts About The $7.25 Million Ashford Settlement Case

By Beryl Dalton


Graduating with a valid degree is the dream of virtually every college student. This will guarantee a good job a bright future and possibly a lavish lifestyle. All these depend on where you start from. However, the recent headlines only leave us in worry on the path that some institutions have taken. The infamous court ruling on the $7.25 million Ashford Settlement has sparked huge controversies and here is a look into this.

Bridgepoint Education Inc San Diego, the Des Moines Iowa and the center of it all, Ashford University were given a court order requiring them to settle a 7.25 million fee . This was a compensation for consumer fraud charges. The above institutions have led to graduates being denied licenses for their various degrees, loss of money and in debt and time also. These were as a result of false information all aimed at getting more students to enroll.

These institutions went against a number of laws contained in the Iowa Consumer Fraud Act. According to Attorney Miller, these included the following. Making of false and misguiding data to students in order to win their trust for enrollment purpose was the first charge. Secondly, they were accused of using overly emotional and pressurized techniques to impede rational choice on the prospective students.

The institutions were also brought to book for hiding vital data on their curriculum and institutions agenda from the prospective students. They also misguided the students that having an education degree from this institution will guarantee a job while it is not the truth. Matter of fact, more money, time and a change in the curriculum offered ought to change.

The nature of the settlement took the following nature. An Assurance of Voluntary Compliance as it is termed required the companies to pay up $7.25 million. The $250000 was to go to the actualization of the payment and reimbursement process to the many Iowa students through the government which was to receive the $7000000. However, the accused parties refused to these.

The court further limited the scope of the beneficiaries. Those who were to benefit from the reimbursement were those students who had already graduated and were unable to get licenses on the basis of validity of their papers. It also ordered the school to change a number of its practices going forward. The nature of their advertisements needed to be non-coercive and less emotional.

Secondly, they were expected to desist from making false, misguiding and hood winking information to the students. They also were to give full information about their university to the public or potential students. They also were to be clear on the licensing and its possibility unless true, when pursuing a degree in Ashford University. Lastly, they were cautioned on engaging in unfair practice.

An annual report was required form the Ashford University every year on all the financial activities. The attorney argued watchdog over this institution will surely help. In addition, it was to allow the students who would want to drop out to do so freely within the first three weeks in the course.




About the Author:



Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire