Subscribe to our mailing list

X

Lawsuit Against College is a Bombshell of Deception

By on January 25, 2016

Both for-profit and non-profit colleges and universities are going to come under much more scrutiny very quickly as more people awaken to the reality they were lied to and deceived by schools to get them to go deep in debt. Want to know more, see Millions of Federal Student Loans Lining Up to Be Eliminated and Borrowers Repaid.

I’ve been making the case that schools of all flavors have engaged in practices that got people to sign on the line for loans without any likelihood those loans would result in even a better than 50-50 chance of a degree.

I’ve documented cases where non-profit colleges continue to enroll students when only one out of ten actually graduates. At some point both the student and the parent who might be cosigning should be informed that there is a 90% chance you’ll never graduate, for whatever reason, when you go into debt for $25,000 to $150,000.

Back in 1980 the Federal Trade Commission offer Congress a couple of definitions on what might be thought of as unfair and deceptive behavior. When you apply it to the situation where a college is actively and enthusiastically putting parents and students in debt with no expectation of a 50-50 chance of a good outcome, it becomes interesting.

The FTC defined “unfair” as a situation that “In most cases a substantial injury involves monetary harm, as when sellers coerce consumers into purchasing unwanted goods or services or when consumers buy defective goods or services on credit but are unable to assert against the creditor claims or defenses arising from the transaction.”

The FTC defined deception as “a representation, omission or practice that is likely to mislead the consumer.” And, “the representation, omission, or practice must be a “material” one. The basic question is whether the act or practice is likely to affect the consumer’s conduct or decision with regard to a product or service. If so, the practice is material, and consumer injury is likely, because consumers are likely to have chosen differently but for the deception.”

READ  Before You Enrolled in College Did They Tell You Your Degree Sucks?

On January 15, 2016, a case was unsealed and the complaint made public. The case was an inside whistleblower case against ITT Technical Institute. And sure, ITT has had their issues and problems, but this former ITT Dean of Academic Affairs, Rodney Lipscomb, makes so many claims the school engaged in unfair and deceptive behavior to get students to enroll and go into debt, that you have to stand up and take notice.

The Suit

Lipscomb worked in the education field for 20 years and was recognized for his skills by being employed by ITT Tech in a management capacity. But after getting to look behind the curtain, Limpscomb came away with the impression:

  • ITT engages in a systematic scheme to defraud the government by receiving Title IV money while clearly violating conditions of Title IV payments.
  • ITT systematically violates conditions of payments when it enrolls students that are not equipped, or prepared, to succeed in ITT’s course of study.
  • ITT systematically violates conditions of payment when it pressures recruitment representatives to “dig in” to a student’s pain to pressure the student to enroll.
  • ITT systematically violates conditions of payment when it lies to students about what ITT’s programs train students to do, and the kinds of jobs students can expect to get when they get out of the program.
  • ITT systematically violates conditions of payment when it changes, refuses to explain, and lies to students about the financial obligations the student will have to meet during the student’s enrollment at ITT, and after the student completes the program.
  • ITT systematically violates conditions of payment when it offers promotions and compensation incentives based on the number of students its recruitment representatives can enroll.
  • ITT systematically violates conditions of payment when it instructs its campuses to lie about, or alter, placement rate reports.

In the case unsealed, Limpscomb documents these alarming allegations in detail and I invite you to read the entire complaint, click here.

READ  ITT Tech Equal Opportunity Scam for Both Students and Some Lenders

Once you read the complaint and allegations, feel free to post your comments below and let me know what you think about the claim the school defrauded students. And if they did, should students still be required to repay the student loans?


If you have a credit or debt question you’d like to ask just use the online form. I’m happy to help you totally for free.

About Steve Rhode

Steve Rhode is the Get Out of Debt Guy and has been helping good people with bad debt problems since 1994. You can learn more about Steve, here.

3 Comments

  1. jj grey

    January 27, 2016 at 10:48 am

    As a multiple degree holder, and someone who worked within public, non-profit, and for profit, secondary educational institutions I can say without a doubt that the practices listed as being done by ITT are likely conducted by all secondary educational institutions to some extent or another.
    What makes things worse is that the for profit institutions must not (by law) get more than 90% of their funds from the title 4 sources, SO they just charge 10% more than the max that title 4 will give someone; and *help* the student make up the difference plus some living expense money with private student loans (for which the schools get various sorts of beneficial financial agreements with the lenders). When I could I quit working for the private for profit college because, the money was not enough to offset the moral harm I felt it engaged in, when less than 25% of my students could find jobs in the career field they were seeking, and curricula would be changed on them multiple times often either short changing their education or keeping them in school longer than predicted/planed.
    Add in how the Student loan lenders keep getting the laws changed in their favor (using their massive profits to fund the lobbying of congress) and the entire educational edifice is clearly a financial bubble being kept alive only through legislative fiat and preying on the students, especially those least likely to have advantage (I was asked to instruct at least a half dozen students who had neither high school diplomas nor GEDs – although there are exceptions to the rule that those are good indicators of college success, the rule is mostly true. Few finished the courses to degree or certificate, and fewer went on to succeed in the field.)

    • Steve Rhode

      January 29, 2016 at 3:22 pm

      “legislative fiat,” love it!

  2. Michael Bovee

    January 25, 2016 at 11:26 am

    The pattern of deception and abuse alleged by the whistle blower in the case suggests to me that many students that attended this Florida ITT campus, and perhaps others, would qualify for a discharge under the borrower defense guidelines. The programs that were shut down, or that people were guided into (whether credits transferred or not), are easy targets to be sure. But there are serious issues abound in the claims made.

Share a Comment / Leave a Reply