<p>They offered full tuition. You got full tuition. Just because a mistake was made about which tuition you were eligible for does not entitle you to some windfall due to an honest mistake in what can be complex rules of residency that might not have been known when the offer was made. You can’t compare it to some store where everyone pays the same prices. You are cheating others out of the money they deserve.</p>
<p>Correct me if I am wrong, younghoss, but I thought the scholarship offer was for 8 semesters of OOS tuition, it was not a generic offer for “full tuition”. Perhaps this is causing some confusion.</p>
<p>Depends on the exact wording of the scholarship offer.
For example, here is a direct quote from an OOS offer my son received:</p>
<p>“The XXX Scholarship covers 2/3 of your tuition and fees for four years. Today, that value equates to $XXXXX and will adjust automatically to cover any increase in tuition…”</p>
<p>Here’s another:</p>
<p>“The combined total value of the XXXX Scholarship exceeds $XXXXX which covers approximately half of the estimated annual cost of tuition, fees, room and board for an out-of-state student at XXX”</p>
<p>You can see that they have actually applied a real dollar value to the scholarship, based on their assumption that we are <em>out of staters</em>. If that condition were to change (or be wrong), I personally would not assume they are going to give my son the money in hand.</p>
<p>OP: do you really believe that being a stickler for the written word is more important (translated: morally acceptable) than the idea of another needy student having access to funds necessary to be able to attend school? This $2,500 (this is the amount I think I saw referenced as the $ given extra for the semester because of a poorly worded scholarship offer) would allow some other student to be in school who otherwise could not. Perhaps this is inappropriately judgmental, since we cannot know all the particulars of your personal circumstances, but this sounds like an excuse for what seems like pure greed.</p>
<p>I can see how those letters could be confusing, DP. I have seen similar letters, that were offered as enticements for ds’s to apply to these schools. Some letters said they would “waive” the OOS tuition, consider ds as an instate student and then meet tuition costs. However, some letters also included stipend $$$, room/board/travel $$ and even in some cases a free laptop. While I doubt they’d have given ds the “cash” if he opted not to take the laptop since he already had one, but, ya don’t know til you ask. </p>
<p>My point in all this, and I repeat, I have no dog in this fight, is that some posters have been, IMO, unnecessarily harsh and insistent on additional documentation. If something is unclear, we can, and should ask specific questions for purpose of clarification. I don’t think we need the OP to post his personal tax return here for us to peruse. (this is just an analogy—)</p>
<p>
I do have to agree-- this is a bit judgemental. I doubt $2500 at a state U is keeping some needy child from getting their education, especially if the school meets 100% of need based aid (I do not know if this school does or does not). Also, many students and families select the school that give them the best aid package, That seems to me to be what happened here. That isn’t greedy, that’s logical. Lighten up people.</p>
<p>By the way, I believe merit money comes out of a different post than need-based aid-- so this additional merit money isnt taking food out of the mouth of a need-based student.</p>
<p>Thanks for the update. Really interesting.</p>
<p>You are exactly correct, 626, and you pointed out a very powerful difference. The wording did offer “oos tuition”, it did not say full tuition and also did not quote a dollar figure. That very important distinction is why this thread exists. They knew he got in-state rates, but they offered oos tuition, and he accepted. In theory, that extra money could have been applied to his many other college related expenses. Some posting here now may not have been aware of that, or, some may have forgotten that info was in my op a month or so ago. And yes, the school(admissions and scholar. comm.) did know about student’s residency while he was considering that school, before offer was made. In fact, it was the school that brought that policy to our attention before he accepted. That too, was in op some time ago, but I don’t blame someone now for forgetting that part. Original thread was some time ago.
Other schools made different offers to student too, but what exactly they offered isn’t relevant here. What is relevant is that he chose this particular school- and like many students- the scholarship offer was a factor. Would it really have been so different if school had offered “full tuition, plus a paid Plan ABC meat-ticket” then later came back to student and withdrew the meal plan, explaining they offered it, but didn’t really intend to offer it?
Most importantly, I hope all will know here that if schools’ scholarship offer had simply said “full-tuition” none of this discussion would have come about. I believe I have a clear understanding of the phrase full tuition. To me, full tuition means the exact cost of tuition, no more no less, and although the actual dollar amount might change if tuition changes during a students’ stay there, the fund would still pay the exact cost of tuition.
To loreli, I do think being a stickler as you put it, is appropriate. Why? Do I think that if student has not met scholarship requirements that school would withdraw scholarship? Yes I do. We depended on their written word as a factor in students decision. Who wouldn’t? Who gets a written scholarship offer, then wonders- do they really mean it? What if we accept, and then school reneges? Does anybody think that, or do we assume the written offer is just as written?I also think its fair because as in prev paragraph scholarship offer was a factor in his school decision. His subsequent decision/actions were partly based on that written offer. I do not agree with the second part of your question that funding my son as they had offered, and as they had budgeted deprived another youngster. Paying more than they budgeted might do so, but that isn’t the case. They are paying bursar(on son’s behalf) less than they budgeted for 7 of 8 semesters, and the 8th semester paying exactly what they budgeted.
Looking at the reverse, suppose school had originally offered student flat $5000 yr, an amount less than full tuition. Suppose student accepted. Then, a couple years in, student told school he wanted full tuition free all 8 semesters. No doubt school would reply “that wasn’t what we offered you”. Who here would think it ok if student then responded “I know that wasn’t what was offered/accepted, but I intended to accept a bigger scholarship” ? And then, who would expect school to be bound by his revelation of what he says he had intended a couple of years before? Not me. If I were the school in this example I’d say “sorry, here’s what we agreed to, so thats what u get.”</p>
<p>Sorry for my typo above-- I meant to say that merit money comes out of a different POT (not post) than need-based money. Sorry for any confusion.</p>
<p>But, but…who ever heard of a school actually paying a student money beyond covering tuition? I still can’t understand how anybody could possibly have understood an offer in this way. I would be embarrassed to claim that this was my understanding.</p>
<p>In our cases, 1) we couldn’t even refuse or give the money back. I tried, but the money was already credited to student’s account. 2) S paid a couple of $K to doing taxes for US and Canada and a bit of aggravation on my part. Its going to be worser for 2008 tax year where its going to US, Canada, and India . </p>
<p>Younghoss, is going to have a tax problem that will cost him and son some money.</p>
<p>Huny-
Tuition covers tuition-- not student fees, room, board, books, etc etc. My s has been awarded a full tuition scholarship (YESS!!!) but we will still be paying about $12k/yr for these ancillary fees. Some schools offer scholarships that defray or cover these additional costs. I am not understanding why this is hard to follow.</p>
<p>oops, another typo. My previous post was in response to Hunt’s post. Hunt may be a “honey” (huny) but that wasn’t my intent in responding :)</p>
<p>Yes…but…but…they don’t offer scholarships that pay you money on top of ancillary fees and expenses. Do they? (I’ve heard of it for athletes, but only under the table.)</p>
<p>No one said he was making a profit from his education. I certainly didnt see that anywhere in this discussion. Where might that be??? </p>
<p>Lets say that for an OOS student, the tuition is $20K. Room, meals, fees, etc is an additonal $12K-- total cost for OOS $32K. Then lets suppose the cost for an instate student is $15K plus the same fees, etc-- so the COA for an instate student is $27K. IF the OPs kid was awarded a scholarship EQUAL to OOS TUITION, that means he/she was awarded $20K for whatever. However, the tuition and fees are calculated at the INSTATE rate- so the COA is $27K. So, per the scholarship letter, school pays $20K, student pays $7K. Why is this so hard to follow???</p>
<p>So, scholarship award is “supposed” to be $20K (equal to OOS tuition) and the student pays the full ancillary fees ($12K) but is <em>really</em> supposed to pay only $7k per the terms of the scholarship award (with the $5k that represents the difference between the in-and OOS tution amount being applied to the other fees). Therefore, student overpaid, and is due $5K refund. Do I have this right younghoss?</p>
<p>Colleges offer scholarships of full tuition, plus a monetary stipend quite often.</p>
<p>^^^ Yup. My older s was offered a full scholarship and a $9k stipend as one of those enticements for NMFs. Did he take it ? Noooo!!! Grrrrr.</p>
<p>You have it exactly right 626. Your example demonstrates the principles behind my situation exactly. Theoretically, the extra money returned to Son from the tuition difference just goes back toward the many other costs associated with attending college. Much like you, I am puzzled by a couple here that don’t grasp 2 things. One, that sometimes colleges offer more than just the cost of tuition to a student they deem desireable, and two, the cost of attending college is much more than just the cost of tuition.
To answer Hunt(post 34) I’d say that no, to the extent of my knowlege colleges do not offer scholarships for more than tuition plus all expenses. I’ve heard of many(commonly athletes) that are offered tuition plus expenses, but have not heard of any for more than that. Of course, my situation is neither “all costs paid” nor is it “all costs paid plus some”. My son was offered more than tuition, but that extra was far short of covering all of his other college expenses.</p>
<p>When a stipend is given it is usually listed as a separate item. When I got mine it said tuition plus a stipend of $400/mo. It’s obvious they made a mistake in classifying residency which impacted actual tuition. Residency cases can be subject to appeals that go well into the school year as the rules are complex.</p>
<p>I may indeed have a tax problem. Since the previous semesters Bursar charged Son the higher oos rate of tuition, our tax papers reflected that figure as income. Now, his tuition bill will be lowered to reflect his in-state status. If the Bursar’s office gives back to scholarship fund the previous overpayments they mistakenly accepted, then that means the cash value of his scholarship goes down, thereby reducing the income of those previous semesters, and as a result reducing my taxes due on that income. I’ll probably wait to see what Univ does, but if they make that adjustment, I will consider filling out a tax amendment so my tax can be re-figured properly.</p>