Following the misunderstandings between Bridgepoint and Education, Inc. And Ashford, there was an agreement that, which was made to settle the disputes. According to court rulings, the Attorney General said that, the procedure used to enroll students in Ashford University was inacceptable. It was further argued that, the university used misleading information to convince student to enroll in the university. Although Bridgepoint and Education, Inc. And Ashford repudiated their mistakes, they decided to enter into an agreement to resolve their issues. Ashford settlement Iowa was made on May 15, 2014.
According to report given by the Attorney General, the following are the main reason why Bridgepoint and Education, Inc. (BPI) and Ashford had misunderstandings. For instance, there were use dubious methods in admitting students. There was also claims that the institution was using unauthorized methods to sell the name of the institution. Moreover, a compulsory fee was charged to student to cater for technology matters.
There are several issues, which were addressed during the agreement. In the agreement, the roles of the administrator were outlined. For instance, administrator was appointed. His main duty was to oversee Bridgepoint Education, Inc. And Ashford. In addition, administrator was to keep monitoring whether the two parties complied with the agreement for a period of three years. He was to report his findings to the Iowa Attorney General.
As part of the Agreement, it was to be made clear whether the administrator was to work for Bridgepoint Education, Inc. Or Ashford University. After the administrator was appointed, he was not to work either for parties. He was to get a neutral evaluator and he was to monitor the two parties to see if they adhered to the settlement terms.
According to the agreement, Bridgepoint Education, Inc. (BPI) and Ashford were to contribute a certain amount of money. A total of 7,250,000 dollars were to get given as per the agreement. The Attorney General was to determine those parties who were eligible to receive a portion of this money. For example, those residents who had been enrolled in the university were supposed to receive a certain amount of money as reimbursement.
A need arose to as to who met the qualifications to get a portion of the money. As per the General of the states, those residents who had been enrolled in the university before and in during the time when the settlement was be made. It was clear that, the admin had no power to determine those who were qualified to get a portion of these funds.
To the students, the award brought many changes. For instance, they the students were to get genuine, complete and accurate information concerning the university. The settlement also prohibited use of misleading information. In addition, they were not to engage in all sorts of unfair practices.
In order to ensure that there was a good flow of information, the agreement outlined the channels of communication, which were to be followed. To make information flow smoothly and systematically, all case were to be first reported to the administrator. After the administrator had received these claims, he was supposed to report those cases, which seemed complicated to the Attorney General.
According to report given by the Attorney General, the following are the main reason why Bridgepoint and Education, Inc. (BPI) and Ashford had misunderstandings. For instance, there were use dubious methods in admitting students. There was also claims that the institution was using unauthorized methods to sell the name of the institution. Moreover, a compulsory fee was charged to student to cater for technology matters.
There are several issues, which were addressed during the agreement. In the agreement, the roles of the administrator were outlined. For instance, administrator was appointed. His main duty was to oversee Bridgepoint Education, Inc. And Ashford. In addition, administrator was to keep monitoring whether the two parties complied with the agreement for a period of three years. He was to report his findings to the Iowa Attorney General.
As part of the Agreement, it was to be made clear whether the administrator was to work for Bridgepoint Education, Inc. Or Ashford University. After the administrator was appointed, he was not to work either for parties. He was to get a neutral evaluator and he was to monitor the two parties to see if they adhered to the settlement terms.
According to the agreement, Bridgepoint Education, Inc. (BPI) and Ashford were to contribute a certain amount of money. A total of 7,250,000 dollars were to get given as per the agreement. The Attorney General was to determine those parties who were eligible to receive a portion of this money. For example, those residents who had been enrolled in the university were supposed to receive a certain amount of money as reimbursement.
A need arose to as to who met the qualifications to get a portion of the money. As per the General of the states, those residents who had been enrolled in the university before and in during the time when the settlement was be made. It was clear that, the admin had no power to determine those who were qualified to get a portion of these funds.
To the students, the award brought many changes. For instance, they the students were to get genuine, complete and accurate information concerning the university. The settlement also prohibited use of misleading information. In addition, they were not to engage in all sorts of unfair practices.
In order to ensure that there was a good flow of information, the agreement outlined the channels of communication, which were to be followed. To make information flow smoothly and systematically, all case were to be first reported to the administrator. After the administrator had received these claims, he was supposed to report those cases, which seemed complicated to the Attorney General.
About the Author:
Our website gives former students and employees the opportunity to learn about Ashford settlement Iowa law. Come and meet the administration team online at http://www.ashfordsettlement.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment