4 ms·

I don't understand the controversy. Sure, you might not like ISAs, but that's not the point. You signed an agreement. The agreement itself is not illegal. If y

I don't understand the controversy. Sure, you might not like ISAs, but that's not the point. You signed an agreement. The agreement itself is not illegal. If you don't like it, why did you sign it? Like, what's the expectation here? That you should be able to get a coding education for free? Even if you got a job unrelated to programming, how does that excuse you from needing to pay for tuition for courses you already completed?

jph00 2y ago
In the article it's shown that the CEO stated that you only have to pay if you make $50k+ as a software engineer. According to the article, they have not had court victories to support their claims.
- lopkeny12ko 2y ago
  When I was doing my undergrad, the university published statistics saying something to the tune of "the average engineering graduate goes on to earn a $60k salary at their first job." If only I knew at the time I could have simply taken the university to court because my starting salary out of school was $55k.
  - Spivak 2y ago
    If paying your student loans was contingent on you making $60k, you made $55k, and they came knocking at your door demanding money yes I do think you have grounds to sue and not pay them. I don't care one iota about the legal minutiae that says they're technically allowed to collect, it is blatantly obvious what the students thought they were signing and so it's really hard to argue "no actually they agreed to <this other thing>." If you present paperwork that you say is the legalese version of the agreement you discussed, have the other party sign it on that basis, and then it isn't that is the lowest hanging fruit of contracts that should be thrown out.
ganoushoreilly 2y ago
I think you can also make an argument that data provided to entice you into the loan turned out to be misrepresented at best, or a full out lie at worst. I do agree with accountability on debts you sign up for, including student loans.
afavour 2y ago
Weren’t they vastly misselling their success rate? They said sign this agreement, we offer 9X% rate of success! Then it turned out to not be the case. TFA: > Most students weren't hired. What little money the school made came from quietly reselling student debt to hedge funds. Legally sound, probably? Morally unsound, definitely.
- lopkeny12ko 2y ago
  Isn't every VC-funded startup overly optimistic? I've seen pitch decks before where founders promise 10x growth over the next 2 years to an impossible projected revenue. It is obviously not going to happen, and indeed did not. Should those founders be criminally charged as well?
  - afavour 2y ago
    IMO there’s a meaningful difference between pitching to VC investors and selling a product to individual customers.
    - mcguire 2y ago
      There is a meaningful legal difference between lying to VC investors and lying to people taking out loans from you.
- drewda 2y ago
  The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said that specific practice was not legally sound. See the subsections titled "Misrepresented their financial interests by selling loans to investors" and "Engaged in illegal contract practices" at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-takes-action-against-coding-boot-camp-bloomtech-and-ceo-austen-allred-for-deceiving-students-and-hiding-loan-costs/ https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-takes...
sangnoir 2y ago
Implicit in your first 2 sentences is the assumption that anything legal can't or shouldn't be controversial. I vehemently disagree with that idea.
Spivak 2y ago
Because the agreement way pay if-and-only-if you get a job as a software developer making >$50k annual salary. They went after people not meeting the conditions. Simple as that.
eloisant 2y ago
The problem is not the ISA itself. 1. They lied about the student success rates 2. They went after graduates for the ISA when they shouldn't (e.g. graduates not working in tech, or continuing the job they had before lambda school)

jph00 2y ago

In the article it's shown that the CEO stated that you only have to pay if you make $50k+ as a software engineer. According to the article, they have not had court victories to support their claims.

lopkeny12ko 2y ago
When I was doing my undergrad, the university published statistics saying something to the tune of "the average engineering graduate goes on to earn a $60k salary at their first job." If only I knew at the time I could have simply taken the university to court because my starting salary out of school was $55k.
- Spivak 2y ago
  If paying your student loans was contingent on you making $60k, you made $55k, and they came knocking at your door demanding money yes I do think you have grounds to sue and not pay them. I don't care one iota about the legal minutiae that says they're technically allowed to collect, it is blatantly obvious what the students thought they were signing and so it's really hard to argue "no actually they agreed to <this other thing>." If you present paperwork that you say is the legalese version of the agreement you discussed, have the other party sign it on that basis, and then it isn't that is the lowest hanging fruit of contracts that should be thrown out.

ganoushoreilly 2y ago

I think you can also make an argument that data provided to entice you into the loan turned out to be misrepresented at best, or a full out lie at worst. I do agree with accountability on debts you sign up for, including student loans.

afavour 2y ago

Weren’t they vastly misselling their success rate? They said sign this agreement, we offer 9X% rate of success! Then it turned out to not be the case. TFA: > Most students weren't hired. What little money the school made came from quietly reselling student debt to hedge funds. Legally sound, probably? Morally unsound, definitely.

lopkeny12ko 2y ago
Isn't every VC-funded startup overly optimistic? I've seen pitch decks before where founders promise 10x growth over the next 2 years to an impossible projected revenue. It is obviously not going to happen, and indeed did not. Should those founders be criminally charged as well?
- afavour 2y ago
  IMO there’s a meaningful difference between pitching to VC investors and selling a product to individual customers.
  - mcguire 2y ago
    There is a meaningful legal difference between lying to VC investors and lying to people taking out loans from you.
drewda 2y ago
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said that specific practice was not legally sound. See the subsections titled "Misrepresented their financial interests by selling loans to investors" and "Engaged in illegal contract practices" at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-takes-action-against-coding-boot-camp-bloomtech-and-ceo-austen-allred-for-deceiving-students-and-hiding-loan-costs/ https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-takes...

sangnoir 2y ago

Implicit in your first 2 sentences is the assumption that anything legal can't or shouldn't be controversial. I vehemently disagree with that idea.

Spivak 2y ago

Because the agreement way pay if-and-only-if you get a job as a software developer making >$50k annual salary. They went after people not meeting the conditions. Simple as that.

eloisant 2y ago

The problem is not the ISA itself. 1. They lied about the student success rates 2. They went after graduates for the ISA when they shouldn't (e.g. graduates not working in tech, or continuing the job they had before lambda school)