The Importance Of The Ashford Settlement
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.
With the accusations leveled against them, the two institutions became very defensive. They were accused of, among other things, intentionally withholding important information needed by students to make informed decisions and using underhanded tactics in their sales. Furthermore, they were accused of setting high fees for registration, which became non-refundable as well as misleading candidates during enrollment to online courses.
Even though the institution denied all the allegations and refused to take responsibility, they agreed to come to a settlement in a bid to conclude the inquiry and pending case against them. They were ordered to pay about seven and a quarter million dollars to victims. His was specifically in response to allegations that recruiters of the university often lied to progress their agenda of increasing recruitment numbers. It was reached after about three years of close investigations.
The settlement had the following conditions and terms. The institution was strictly prohibited from making deceptive, false and misleading statements. Furthermore, it was ordered not to permit any omission of materials that could cause confusion or engage in some underhand practices to coercion to persuade students to enroll. All these were clearly stated in the agreement.
In addition to the above prohibitions, the two agreed on a number of issues. They agreed to make any relevant information required by a student in making informed decisions available. They also agreed to provide the necessary training for all personnel, take the right steps to ensure retention and adequately compensate any third party that provides useful leads resulting in recruitment.
The agreement appointed Thomas J. Perrelli as the settlement administrator. He was asked to independently review the compliance of the two institutions to the terms demanded. He has the power to listen to recorded phone conversations, listen and review complaints, look at any records he requires that are helpful to his investigation as well as talking to any current and former student or employee. His task is to identify any problems and successes and report these findings annually to the attorney general and Bridgepoint Education Incorporated.
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.
There is an increase in the demand for education in the country. Many institutions are using underhanded methods to enroll students in their facilities. This is because there is a lot of competition in the industry. The agreement is a win for every stakeholder in education because it goes to show that the law respects education.
With the accusations leveled against them, the two institutions became very defensive. They were accused of, among other things, intentionally withholding important information needed by students to make informed decisions and using underhanded tactics in their sales. Furthermore, they were accused of setting high fees for registration, which became non-refundable as well as misleading candidates during enrollment to online courses.
Even though the institution denied all the allegations and refused to take responsibility, they agreed to come to a settlement in a bid to conclude the inquiry and pending case against them. They were ordered to pay about seven and a quarter million dollars to victims. His was specifically in response to allegations that recruiters of the university often lied to progress their agenda of increasing recruitment numbers. It was reached after about three years of close investigations.
The settlement had the following conditions and terms. The institution was strictly prohibited from making deceptive, false and misleading statements. Furthermore, it was ordered not to permit any omission of materials that could cause confusion or engage in some underhand practices to coercion to persuade students to enroll. All these were clearly stated in the agreement.
In addition to the above prohibitions, the two agreed on a number of issues. They agreed to make any relevant information required by a student in making informed decisions available. They also agreed to provide the necessary training for all personnel, take the right steps to ensure retention and adequately compensate any third party that provides useful leads resulting in recruitment.
The agreement appointed Thomas J. Perrelli as the settlement administrator. He was asked to independently review the compliance of the two institutions to the terms demanded. He has the power to listen to recorded phone conversations, listen and review complaints, look at any records he requires that are helpful to his investigation as well as talking to any current and former student or employee. His task is to identify any problems and successes and report these findings annually to the attorney general and Bridgepoint Education Incorporated.
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.
There is an increase in the demand for education in the country. Many institutions are using underhanded methods to enroll students in their facilities. This is because there is a lot of competition in the industry. The agreement is a win for every stakeholder in education because it goes to show that the law respects education.
About the Author:
If you are looking for the facts about Ashford settlement, go to our web pages online here today. Additional details are available at http://www.ashfordsettlement.com now.