<p>You dont know that what the OP presented is “clearly illegal and immoral”. I see many assumptions and conclusions being jumped to here. What I also see is lack of manners and general rude behavior. Perhaps that cave is where some people do belong…</p>
<p>If this scenario has been presented before, I apologize, but suppose my D is offered a full 4 year scholarship as an OOS student and then I move to that state and can claim in state tuition for 2 years - do I get the difference in cash? I don’t think anyone would expect to get the difference. Now would I expect to get the difference in the OP’s situation.</p>
<p>
This is correct IMO, based upon the assumptions made. What I said earlier is also correct.
</p>
<p>good points curm…as far as “illegal and immoral” I surely don’t want to make that call at any time for anyone. </p>
<p>I have been posting on this board for over a year and there have been times
I felt I was asking a question or asking others opinions and was judged
harshly. I apologize here and now to anyone who has felt I judged them. That is the reason I sometimes tell my son, pick up the phone, the IM thing just doesn’t carry the emotion sometimes. </p>
<p>Please let’s be kinder on these boards. My goodness.</p>
<p>I think what is galling to some of us reading the POV of the OP (how’s that for acronyms?) is the repeated phrasing that her son was “enticed” to this school and a sense, on the part of the OP, that he was enticed in a bait-and-switch or misleading manner.</p>
<p>Yet, that story holds no water based on the OP’s own tale of woe. Had his/her son been “enticed” by an offer of more $$ than his actual tuition cost, he would have expected that cash back or cash toward other costs of attendance right from the get-go. Yet he attended for 5 happy semesters without any complaint. To me, that makes it clear that he was not “enticed” by any more than the offer of free tuition. If his acceptance of their “enticing” offer was based on the expectation of cash back, why wasn’t he or the family knocking at the Bursar’s Office door upon the arrival of that very first tuition and fee statement?</p>
<p>I’ll tell you why - the enticement was the offer of tuition free attendance. Which is what they expected and what they got.</p>
<p>Now, the OP is attempting to create a scenario of malfeasance by the University, a sense that the University did not honor its offer, did not live up to its end of the bargain.</p>
<p>Like I say, I find it galling.</p>
<p>Further galling is the OP’s refusal to understand, as other posters have pointed out, how this works. Tuition scholarhips are, in effect, discounts or waivers. The Bursar’s office is not “keeping the money for themselves,” as the OP has put it.</p>
<p>It’s all not clear. But if, when applying, the student was an in-state student, and was awarded a scholarship clearly identified as for an OOS student, and accepted it even though he knew he was not qualified for it, he has committed fraud. It might have been an “honest mistake” on the part of the school, but it wasn’t an “honest mistake” made in accepting it. It is exactly like the gentleman now being charged criminally with fraud for spending some of the money unwittingly put in his bank account by the bank, even though he informed the bank of their error.</p>
<p>I don’t know, however, if the student was in-state at the time, and whether the scholarship clearly stated it was for an out-of-state student or for out-of-state tuition.</p>
<p>What’s really pathetic are some of the posters in this thread. Get a life.</p>
<p>If a college sent you a check for $2500 as a refund for the semester, you would either assume that: A, the college made a mistake and owes you nothing, or B, the college did not make a mistake and owes you even more money. People are denouncing a stranger they barely know as practically evil incarnate, but what sort of fool would not pursue $20,000 if they believed the scholarship said they should have? Posters are responding as if getting a $2500 check you didn’t expect is an everyday occurence, and their intepretation of such a bizzare event is the only logical explanation. Lawyers SHOULD be involved when things like this happen. This is why we HAVE lawyers.</p>
<p>Good grief.</p>
<p>
No, posters are responding to an OP who (1) didn’t pick up the phone and call the Bursar’s Office about this unexpected refund (2) consistently (and quite annoyingly imo) casts the University in a negative light, as if the University has attempted to cheat her family out of its just due.</p>
<p>How anyone can post in that tone and not expect a response to the tone, as well as the “innocent” question, is beyond me.</p>
<p>A reciprocal agreement is a bit like a scholarship for the OOS student. The OOS student is basically getting a “scholarship” from the school that allows him to pay only instate tuition. This same student cannot expect to get a scholarship covering OOS tuition AND a scholarship reducing OOS tuition to instate tuition. This is exactly where the problem lies. By receiving a scholarship that covers the full cost of OOS tuition, the student would no longer need the scholarship that reduces OOS tuition to instate tuition. The scholarship committee chose to give OP’s son a scholarship that was BETTER than the other scholarship he could have received — he gets EVERYTHING paid, not just OOS-reduced-to-instate. The better scholarship prevails. I believe the OP will find that the reimbursement was a mistake on the part of the bursar’s office. For the sake of customer service, they may simply tell him to keep it this time … or they may say, “Oops … we made a mistake & we’d like our money back.” </p>
<p>I would be interested in knowing the school, although I don’t think the OP is inclined to share the info. I bet I could go to the financial aid regulations & find the policies for awarding aid … which should spell out things like this. I am guessing that there is a policy that states that a student who automatically qualifies for a scholarship & then receives a larger scholarship does not receive both but receives only the larger scholarship. If so, the reciprocal agreement scholarship would be negated & the OOS scholarship would replace it. And no money would be owed the OP. If there is no policy, I suppose the OP could push it & see how a court would interpret this. It’s his right to do so. I don’t know how a judge would rule, but I suspect it would be in the school’s favor.</p>
<p>OK…here is my opinion…It took the OP 2 1/2 years to figure this out. The bottom line is that it is unlikely that ANY monies from previous fiscal years will be refunded. That should have been appealed (if there was indeed a basis for appeal) during THAT academic and fiscal year. Now…for my opinion which is just that…MY opinion…this student is not entitled to a refund for tuition that was never paid. It would be one thing if the school didn’t GIVE this student full tuition. The student GOT full tuition. The school awarded full tuition IF the student had OOS he would have gotten the value of OOS. The bottom line is the student didn’t have an OOS tuition liability. The school upheld their deal…full tuition.</p>
<p>So bandtenhu, do you in anyway really think the OP deserves a REFUND of 20,000 though they paid nothing, all on the precept that they were instate and received an OOS scholarship?</p>
<p>How can you be owed any money if 1’ you paid nothing, 2- they held up their end of the bargain and did not charge you for tuition-in OR out of state</p>
<p>I think this is what BandTenHut is referrign to
Never in a million yrs would it enter ones mind that perhaps the credit is correct and that it was in need of another look-see? Puleeze</p>
<p>jmmom: Yes, I agree.</p>
<p>kelsmom: Bingo on your post #152- You have it exactly right.</p>
<p>In second clarifying post, OP states</p>
<p>"Because school sent us a surprise refund this semester of the difference of the oos tuition he was promised compared to the actual in state tuition he should have been charged. Not that it matters on the principle, but the difference is about $2.5k per sem. This was the first time they’ve had such an action, and that is what caught our attention. </p>
<p>Here is the important part I think:</p>
<p>“They explained the scholarship commitee had promised oos tuition, but that the Bursars office was entitled to only the in state portion, so the difference had to go somewhere.(Their explanation)”</p>
<p>The above sentence would indicate the OP did ask for clarification. OP never has appeared to lie to anyone regarding their state of residence. The admissions office initiated and explained the reciprocal agreement (which is meant for out of state students) to them regarding being eligible for instate tuiton. The OP states that the university has been trying to increase students from the area they are from. </p>
<p>Given that the OP didn’t initiate this refund and obviously has been in contact with the university regarding an explanation of the refund, where’s the fraud or the immorality? They didn’t take the money and run, they asked for an explanation. It is possible that the scholarship committee was using this as a lure to attract a student they wanted from a geographic area they are targeting. The scholarship committee may have been confused or they may have known exactly what they were doing and they made this particular offer this way to get around whatever red tape they would have had offering more than just tuition. </p>
<p>I seriously doubt the bursars office would just refund $2500 because it was inconvenient to handle it in their accounting system. This sets a precedent and will possibly obligate them for future semesters or other students in the same situation. Someone higher up than a clerk had to approve a refund of that size, especially given the possible precedent being set here. There is as much a chance that the scholarship folks were asked the intent of the scholarship by the bursars office before the refund was made as there is that they were not asked.</p>
<p>A full tuition scholarship is NOT a full ride. Cost of Attendance (COA) including things such as room, board, books added to tuition is a full ride. If a school gives you more than tuition, it is not paying you to attend. It is simply helping cover other costs of attending their university.</p>
<p>My daughter received a scholarship that covered more than tuition. The award letter and the college website stated what was covered. The first semester, there was more than what I calculated should be there in her account. (By about $750). Got frustrated after a couple of calls with no answers and decided to leave the money in her account and wait for them to figure it out. Next semester, same thing happens. It wasn’t until the third semester that I figured out what they were actually giving her but I still couldn’t figure out why. She was assured the money was hers and the head of the scholarship office (without our knowledge) sent bursar signed orders to cut her a check for remaining money as her “excess” in account was growing since we left the money there waiting to hear about the recall of funds. </p>
<p>Best I could figure out is this scholarship came from endowed funds. They had a few good years with the investment and so the committee paid for some additional things that were not covered in the original award letter (all legitimate costs). They wouldn’t come right out and tell me that and award letters for new students receiving this scholarship was not changed. (They benefitted also). Apparently, they didn’t want to increase number of scholarships in case investment income went down (which it sure has this year) nor did they want to make this extra money common knowledge so that future recipients had expectations they couldn’t fulfill if investment went down. They also didn’t want to have to match these monies in other scholarships that didn’t have the same success in investments. So, they gave me vague answers to protect themselves from future demands of students with this or other scholarships. </p>
<p>How many parents here, if they were paying room, board books, etc, would send back money to their kid’s university if the bursars office offered an explanation of the refund (which they did). Would most of you say, “Oh no, you’ve done so much for us already, please keep this money and give it to someone more deserving.”? And once given the bursars’ explanation, isn’t it possible you would have a discussion with your spouse that went something like “Well, if they are saying that is the case now, wouldn’t that have been the case in other semesters also? Hmmmmm. I wonder”. I don’t see the OP stating he/she was wanting to write the university and DEMAND they pay money for the last four semesters. All I saw from the OP’s comments was musings about an inquiry into whether the preeceding semesters might be covered under the same policy and if so, was there a way to recover some of the money they spent on room and board in those preceeding semesters.</p>
<p>and bringing in an attorney, not just musings of a curious mind IMHO</p>
<p>keepmesane: Certainly, scholarships exist that are not only full-freight (covering all university costs), but include a stipend every semester as well-- and even paid summer research or internships.</p>
<p>This was not the case here. This was a tuition scholarship (ie, covers only tuition). I agree with kelsmom’s post above; both paragraphs are worth reading if you haven’t already. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really? Actually, the OP stated this in his original post:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I guess I read this differently. I see it as a demand, not simply a “musing about an inquiry.”</p>
<p>I’m not sure why the OP asked for any opinion, since he obviously has already sent in the letter stating that “a refund is in order.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sounds like it to me, since the title of the thread is “Not getting scholarshpi [sic] promised…”</p>
<p>The OP feels entitled to the refund, and says so.</p>
<p>so I live in California, and i go to school in Oregon…Oregon has some special program to entice kids to go there, so they say i can have instate tuition- an OOS scholarship as it werem but they are actually basically not charging me for tuition…now, I decide that I want to have the difference, back in cash between the two dollar amounts, because the school is actually “only covering” the instate costs, not the OOS…so the school kindly gives me a free education, as an OOS student (I am really secretly an instate student by the way, so really shouldn’t have even been considered for the OOS scholarship in the first place, but that is a side issue, because…well, just because)…so now, I want the school to pay me the difference between the two tuitions, the OOS state “scholarship” dollar amount, less the amount I should have actually paid…how this makes logical sense to anyone I have no idea…considering I have paid zippo, nada, zilch in tuition</p>
<p>it like saying, here you can have this house for a week for free…usually we charge strangers 1000…then you find out that non-strangers only have to pay 400…though some strangers and nonstrangers get it for free as well, so now you want the 600 dollars “difference” as a refund, because it turns out you weren’t a stranger after all…even thought oyu got it for free in the first place…in error</p>
<p>I think that it never occurred to the OP that the U didn’t know (or someone in some office didn’t know while others did) that son was “instate” due to reciprocal agreement. I think OP thought that even though the U knew son was in-state, a scholarship EQUIVALENT to oos tuition was offered as an award to student and an enticement (why is that suddenly such a bad word?) to come. </p>
<p>Maybe it is clear to many of us that “tuition award” means only tuition, but it was not clear to the OP. And I don’t get the impression that he/she would have pursued ANYTHING if the school hadn’t actually sent him/her a refund check. Why isn’t it reasonable to inquire if the refund applies to prior semesters?</p>
<p>Keepsmesane,
Brilliant. Simply brilliant. Exactly. Well put.</p>