Light University Online

Original response stands [redacted]

I am responding to Revdex.com complaint notification dated January 27, After
reviewing the complaint and conducting a thorough internal review, please accept
the following as *** University Online's official response:
The customer made initial inquiry /30/12, submitted an application
with the
institution on 9/18/12, but has never enrolled as a student
The "lifetime" scholarship in question is available to the customer and, in fact, has
never been withdrawn or modifiedI do feel it necessary to indicate that this
scholarship is not a "full" scholarship; however, it does provide a reduction in
tuition costs
*** University Online never had a definitive agreement or articulation
arrangement, with the "local college." The local college initiated contact with us in
3/31/and, although there was some initial interest, the relationship never
progressed to a contractual oneAs a result of this, and due to what we felt were
repeated and unauthorized advertising infringements on our brand by the local
college, we made the decision to notify the college that we were no longer interested
in forming a relationship
We are happy to help the customer enroll in one of our programs of study and take
advantage of the "lifetime" reduced tuition scholarship
Sincerely,
*** ** ***
Vice President of Enrollment Management

Revdex.com:
This response is in reference to complaint ID ***
*** University Online offers course material which is recognized for continuing education with the American Psychological Association.
Personal research has revealed they are legitTheir certificates and diplomas are valid in the usage they are intended forI previously had some misunderstandings about the programInitially I believed they had revoked a scholarship from a group of students at a college but that too was a misunderstandingThe scholarship is still available to themI apologize for the misunderstandingI jumped the gunThe program is really an incredible program
Regards,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
 
Had Mr. [redacted] conducted a thorough
review as stated he would have discovered that on 04/12/12 the
following message was sent: “I’m pleased to announce that the
[redacted] University Online leadership has approved of the partnership
with [redacted] University. I just hung up with Mr. [redacted] about
his family going to start courses with us . . . I have told him that
we would like for anyone that calls in to refer all calls to me, [redacted], the
head coach of [redacted] University Online and tell him that you are calling from [redacted] University.
This way we have one person that you can connect with and will help all students get started.
All students will need to submit a $25 application to be accepted at
[redacted] University Online. You will all receive the Charter Scholarship
for all of your courses at the cost of $299 each.”
That same day I received a message
stating: “I’m pleased to announce that the [redacted] University
Online leadership has approved of the partnership with [redacted] Light
University. When you and family members submit a $25 application fee
you will receive the lifetime Charter Scholarship for all of your
courses at the cost of $299 each. [redacted] University has
agreed to give you credits for your courses.”
I think this clearly is a definitive
agreement. However Mr. [redacted] states: “[redacted] University Online
never had a definitive agreement or articulation arrangement, with
the local college." There can be no more of a definitive
statement than “I’m pleased to announce that the [redacted] University
Online leadership has approved of the partnership with [redacted] Light
University” followed by the details of how that partnership will
work.
In short the partnership agreement was
this: [redacted] University Online (hereinafter referred to as LUO) gave
permission to [redacted] University (hereinafter referred to as
DLU) to use LUO material in the classroom and in turn DLU would give
college credits to the students taking the courses. The LUO/DLU
partnership was to provide three things for the students: (1) LUO
courses for students (2) Lifetime scholarships for students (3)
Credits for LUO courses through DLU.
By revoking the partnership LUO
in effect revoked the students promise of lifetime scholarships and
credits for LUO courses.
DLU wrote “We propose that our
students sign up through you directly, make payments to you directly,
and receive coaching through you directly, but we would schedule
class time at our school where students will individually do their
LUO studies online at the same time.”
Mr. [redacted] allegations of “repeated
and unauthorized advertising infringements on our brand by the local
college” is untrue. The college never advertised LUO in any way. I
personally set up a wordpress blog in which I did advertise the
LUO/DLU partnership. However THIS BLOG WAS NOT  AVAILABLE TO THE
PUBLIC. It was restricted to private viewing and internal settings in
the blog made it unavailable to search engines. LUO was able to see
it from a link which I personally sent them. Even so, I placed the
following disclaimer in the blog : “Although the [redacted] University
Online program is utilized by DLU it is solely and independently
regulated and owned by [redacted] University Online which is not
responsible for any of the actions or any of the other academic
platforms of DLU. After registering for this class at DLU, the
student must register again directly through [redacted] University Online
and all expenses for this class are paid directly to [redacted] University
Online. You may contact the administrators of the program at the
following link:  [redacted] University Online.”  
In summery: The abrupt email sent to
the school gave no explanation for revoking the partnership and left
a question mark on my character. Further, by revoking the partnership
LUO in effect revoked the students promise of lifetime scholarships
and credits for LUO courses.
 
Regards,
[redacted]

Original response stands.
[redacted]

Review: The [redacted] University Online web site promises Certificates in Biblical Counseling and Masters Diplomas in Biblical Counseling. In personal telephone calls and emails with them my family and I were promised that the [redacted] University Online scholarship would be made available to my family and I for "a lifetime" and that a local college were accepting credits for all courses taken at LUO. They had a partnership with LUO. Now I am told that because of a personal feud with one of the college adjuncts that my family and I no longer have "a lifetime" scholarship, we can no longer take courses, and that the college can no longer give me credits for LUO because LUO went back on their word.Desired Settlement: We were promised a lifetime scholarship through LUO and it should remain valid to my family and I for "a lifetime." Although new students may not be able to come in under the partnership of LUO and the other college, my family and I should be grandfathered into the "partnership" promise. WE should all be able to receive the lifetime scholarship while receiving credits. I also feel I should receive an apology from Mr. [redacted] for putting a question mark on my character in the eyes of the college.

Business

Response:

I am responding to Revdex.com complaint notification dated January 27, 2014. After

reviewing the complaint and conducting a thorough internal review, please accept

the following as [redacted] University Online's official response:

1. The customer made initial inquiry 3 /30/12, submitted an application with the

institution on 9/18/12, but has never enrolled as a student.

2. The "lifetime" scholarship in question is available to the customer and, in fact, has

never been withdrawn or modified. I do feel it necessary to indicate that this

scholarship is not a "full" scholarship; however, it does provide a reduction in

tuition costs.

3. [redacted] University Online never had a definitive agreement or articulation

arrangement, with the "local college." The local college initiated contact with us in

3/31/12 and, although there was some initial interest, the relationship never

progressed to a contractual one. As a result of this, and due to what we felt were

repeated and unauthorized advertising infringements on our brand by the local

college, we made the decision to notify the college that we were no longer interested

in forming a relationship.

We are happy to help the customer enroll in one of our programs of study and take

advantage of the "lifetime" reduced tuition scholarship.

Sincerely,

Vice President of Enrollment Management

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response offer made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.

Had Mr. [redacted] conducted a thorough

review as stated he would have discovered that on 04/12/12 the

following message was sent: “I’m pleased to announce that the

[redacted] University Online leadership has approved of the partnership

with [redacted] University. I just hung up with Mr. [redacted] about

his family going to start courses with us . . . I have told him that

we would like for anyone that calls in to refer all calls to me, [redacted], the

head coach of [redacted] University Online and tell him that you are calling from [redacted] University.

This way we have one person that you can connect with and will help all students get started.

All students will need to submit a $25 application to be accepted at

[redacted] University Online. You will all receive the Charter Scholarship

for all of your courses at the cost of $299 each.”

That same day I received a message

stating: “I’m pleased to announce that the [redacted] University

Online leadership has approved of the partnership with [redacted] Light

University. When you and family members submit a $25 application fee

you will receive the lifetime Charter Scholarship for all of your

courses at the cost of $299 each. [redacted] University has

agreed to give you credits for your courses.”

I think this clearly is a definitive

agreement. However Mr. [redacted] states: “[redacted] University Online

never had a definitive agreement or articulation arrangement, with

the local college." There can be no more of a definitive

statement than “I’m pleased to announce that the [redacted] University

Online leadership has approved of the partnership with [redacted] Light

University” followed by the details of how that partnership will

work.

In short the partnership agreement was

this: [redacted] University Online (hereinafter referred to as LUO) gave

permission to [redacted] University (hereinafter referred to as

DLU) to use LUO material in the classroom and in turn DLU would give

college credits to the students taking the courses. The LUO/DLU

partnership was to provide three things for the students: (1) LUO

courses for students (2) Lifetime scholarships for students (3)

Credits for LUO courses through DLU.

By revoking the partnership LUO

in effect revoked the students promise of lifetime scholarships and

credits for LUO courses.

DLU wrote “We propose that our

students sign up through you directly, make payments to you directly,

and receive coaching through you directly, but we would schedule

class time at our school where students will individually do their

LUO studies online at the same time.”

Mr. [redacted] allegations of “repeated

and unauthorized advertising infringements on our brand by the local

college” is untrue. The college never advertised LUO in any way. I

personally set up a wordpress blog in which I did advertise the

LUO/DLU partnership. However THIS BLOG WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO THE

PUBLIC. It was restricted to private viewing and internal settings in

the blog made it unavailable to search engines. LUO was able to see

it from a link which I personally sent them. Even so, I placed the

following disclaimer in the blog : “Although the [redacted] University

Online program is utilized by DLU it is solely and independently

regulated and owned by [redacted] University Online which is not

responsible for any of the actions or any of the other academic

platforms of DLU. After registering for this class at DLU, the

student must register again directly through [redacted] University Online

and all expenses for this class are paid directly to [redacted] University

Online. You may contact the administrators of the program at the

following link: [redacted] University Online.”

In summery: The abrupt email sent to

the school gave no explanation for revoking the partnership and left

a question mark on my character. Further, by revoking the partnership

LUO in effect revoked the students promise of lifetime scholarships

and credits for LUO courses.

Regards,

Business

Response:

Original response stands.

Consumer

Response:

This response is in reference to complaint ID [redacted].

[redacted] University Online offers course material which is recognized for continuing education with the American Psychological Association.

Personal research has revealed they are legit. Their certificates and diplomas are valid in the usage they are intended for. I previously had some misunderstandings about the program. Initially I believed they had revoked a scholarship from a group of students at a college but that too was a misunderstanding. The scholarship is still available to them. I apologize for the misunderstanding. I jumped the gun. The program is really an incredible program.

Regards,