Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices • Hacker News Board

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#41

Post by michaelbuckbee » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:31 PM UTC

pradn wrote: post #30

austenallred wrote: post #29

Hey everyone, Pretty excited to reach settlement on this one. The DFPI is a new regulatory agency in California that was tasked with reviewing Lambda School’s new incentive-aligned tuition ( https://lambdaschool.com/tuition/tuition-options ) in California. They came back requesting that we update a bankruptcy provision in the agreement to clarify that these agreements are dischargeable in bankruptcy, and to do a revi…

Your bizarre cheeriness in the face of "Agreeing to End Deceptive Educational Financing Practices" is offputting, especially when coupled with the way college financing has led to generational deadweight, anxiety, and hopelessness.

I'd agree with you except that in this case it seems like the "deception" was actually working against Lambda school.

Previously -> if you go bankrupt you still owe us.

Now -> if you go bankrupt you don't owe us.

On the face of it this seems like it would make Lambda school _more_ attractive than less.

Note, the clause in question is "qualified educational loan…subject to the limitations on dischargeability contained in…the United States Bankruptcy Code."

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#42

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:32 PM UTC

austenallred wrote: post #29

Hey everyone, Pretty excited to reach settlement on this one. The DFPI is a new regulatory agency in California that was tasked with reviewing Lambda School’s new incentive-aligned tuition ( https://lambdaschool.com/tuition/tuition-options ) in California. They came back requesting that we update a bankruptcy provision in the agreement to clarify that these agreements are dischargeable in bankruptcy, and to do a revi…

[deleted]

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#43

Post by pseudalopex » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:33 PM UTC

davidw wrote: post #37

pradn wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your bizarre cheeriness in the face of "Agreeing to End Deceptive Educational Financing Practices" is offputting, especially when coupled with the way college financing has led to generational deadweight, anxiety, and hopelessness.

What's he supposed to do? Rant about the government? Making the best of it and moving on is probably the best move, since it doesn't sound like a big hit to their business. Also, it looks like you get out of Lambda School debts via bankruptcy, which you don't with regular college, so that's... an improvement?

Saying nothing was an option.

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#44

Post by songqin » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:33 PM UTC

srndsnd wrote: post #6

I'm confused as to why this headline has to be so close to clickbait. I'm not even one to stand up for people like Lambda, I think a lot of bootcamps are shady at best, and actively deceptive at worst (Trilogy). It is definitely important to note that that these loans can be discharged in bankruptcy. But as far as I know, isn't this less stringent than typical student loans, which can't be discharged in bankruptcy? I…

What do you specifically find deceptive about Trilogy? Just curious, as I see them around me a lot.

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#45

Post by jamiequint » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:35 PM UTC

pradn wrote: post #30

austenallred wrote: post #29

Hey everyone, Pretty excited to reach settlement on this one. The DFPI is a new regulatory agency in California that was tasked with reviewing Lambda School’s new incentive-aligned tuition ( https://lambdaschool.com/tuition/tuition-options ) in California. They came back requesting that we update a bankruptcy provision in the agreement to clarify that these agreements are dischargeable in bankruptcy, and to do a revi…

Your bizarre cheeriness in the face of "Agreeing to End Deceptive Educational Financing Practices" is offputting, especially when coupled with the way college financing has led to generational deadweight, anxiety, and hopelessness.

Your inane judginess is offputting, especially when coupled with how Lambda School is providing attractive alternative options the expensive colleges you're whining about.

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#46

Post by nicklecompte » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:36 PM UTC

nrmitchi wrote: post #26

pseudalopex wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lambda School engaged in deceptive but apparently legal practices. A new law made them illegal. Lambda School continued to engage in the now illegal practices. The state began enforcement proceedings. The parties settled.

Part of my point, that I did not make clear, is that this law came into effect January 1st. A 3 month turn-around between something becoming illegal, and a "settlement" being reached, feels awfully fast to me, and implies that everyone involved was actually trying to follow this new law.

I don’t know why you’re being so pedantic:

- the conduct Lambda School engaged in became unlawful on Jan 1

- Lambda School continued engaging in that contact well-past Jan 1

- The state called them out and a settlement (favorable to CA) was quickly reached

It is far more likely that a settlement was reached because the conduct was clearly unlawful but not deeply damaging - so worth enforcing but not worth an ugly legal brawl.

I sincerely don’t know why you’re pretending Lambda was “actually trying to follow this new law” and insinuating there’s something suspicious about anything here - it is not an onerous regulation and Lambda had plenty of warning. Clearly they weren’t trying to follow the law! (probably more out of bad management than nefariousness)

Regardless: companies do not get an implicit grace period between when a law comes into force and when the company is actually required to obey it. In certain cases the law can be unconstitutionally coercive or unfair but obviously not here.

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#47

Post by jamiequint » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:37 PM UTC

pseudalopex wrote: post #36

austenallred wrote: post #29

Hey everyone, Pretty excited to reach settlement on this one. The DFPI is a new regulatory agency in California that was tasked with reviewing Lambda School’s new incentive-aligned tuition ( https://lambdaschool.com/tuition/tuition-options ) in California. They came back requesting that we update a bankruptcy provision in the agreement to clarify that these agreements are dischargeable in bankruptcy, and to do a revi…

They requested you stop making false claims about dischargeability. And about the program being free. Calling the former clarifying is deceptive. So is omitting the latter.

Go whine and be negative somewhere else. You fucking people, seriously.

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#48

Post by judge2020 » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:37 PM UTC

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #41

pradn wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your bizarre cheeriness in the face of "Agreeing to End Deceptive Educational Financing Practices" is offputting, especially when coupled with the way college financing has led to generational deadweight, anxiety, and hopelessness.

I'd agree with you except that in this case it seems like the "deception" was actually working against Lambda school. Previously -> if you go bankrupt you still owe us. Now -> if you go bankrupt you don't owe us. On the face of it this seems like it would make Lambda school _more_ attractive than less. Note, the clause in question is "qualified educational loan…subject to the limitations on dischargeability contained…

Maybe more attractive, but only in the 'defraud them by going bankrupt after getting the certification' sense, where they educate the students without getting paid in some cases.

One of the biggest reasons student loans can't be forgiven in bankruptcy is because, after school, chances are the graduate has zero assets and can go bankrupt with the only downside being destroying their credit for 7 years. Whether or not you think this is justified or fair is up to you, but the situation before this ruling simply [de-]elevated Lambda School to the same playing field as other educational institutions - the only difference being that those institutions don't offer student loans themselves.

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#49

Post by renewiltord » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:37 PM UTC

vineyardmike wrote: post #34

renewiltord wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you. I believe that we need the following reform: * Information Reform: Schools should be required to report median income of graduating class by major by year (with number of declined-to-disclose). Students should know what they're going to get out of this program. * Incentive Alignment: School programs above a certain cost should only be payable either up-front or via income share agreement. Schools should…

> education yielded economic gain for student What a sad narrow view of education. I recognize that for many education is a vocational experience meant to provide accesss to better jobs, but really education can be so much more broad and valuable.

I think it is very rude of you to have removed the other part of that sentence that addressed that. To then insult me based on this misreading is really boorish. If you are interested in conversing with me, please do not do that.

Now, for anyone else reading for whom it wasn't clear: I want schools to primarily receive economic benefit by providing economic benefit but (quoting from above) I believe students should have an escape valve to pay for education that does not have direct economic benefit. I believe that paying upfront is sufficient as an escape valve.

Re: Lambda School agrees to end deceptive educational financing practices

#50

Post by marcinzm » Mon, Apr 26, 2021, 9:38 PM UTC

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #41

pradn wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your bizarre cheeriness in the face of "Agreeing to End Deceptive Educational Financing Practices" is offputting, especially when coupled with the way college financing has led to generational deadweight, anxiety, and hopelessness.

I'd agree with you except that in this case it seems like the "deception" was actually working against Lambda school. Previously -> if you go bankrupt you still owe us. Now -> if you go bankrupt you don't owe us. On the face of it this seems like it would make Lambda school _more_ attractive than less. Note, the clause in question is "qualified educational loan…subject to the limitations on dischargeability contained…

It's not about being attractive, it's about ex-students not declaring bankruptcy because they think it won't remove their lambda school loans. Thus lambda school keeps getting money from them instead of getting nothing after they decide to declare bankruptcy. That clause was, in my eyes, clearly designed to discourage students from exercising their ability to clear debts via bankruptcy.