WLC Sues DEAC for $17.4M, Identifies Corruption and Incompetence in Federal Complaint

How is this an "obvious question"?

 

In fact, the complaint is rather direct and uses remarkably plain language. It would be clearer if the appendices were included though, to see the context of relevant correspondence.

 

Yeah, I read it. I'm looking for all the dirty details. Maybe after it's all over and you're counting your money....

 

I am learning this process. There are several steps to it. We file the complaint is step 1. DEAC will try and get it dismissed as frivolous or something, step 2. There will be several exchanges of biting yet deceptively civil official letters back and forth and maybe a counter claim, step 3. A process of discovery is undertaken, 4. Trial, 5. Then 6 settlement, which is what your first question goes to. I believe in a settle the court defines what happens to any award.

For your second question, I am sympathetic. I hold three degrees from schools accredited accredited by this group. However, they took no notice of doing same to my College and myself. Remember, as the captain of a sunk ship, I am now unemployable in this industry.

 

They will become public. We didn't have to include any exhibits to file the complaint, but we wanted to as the more info that we can get public the more egregious and obvious this whole thing becomes. However, unlike what DEAC did to us we are following the law. When the court releases our attachments I will be sure to provide links. I have all of the originals, however I do not know if there will be a redaction process, or what, so I have to wait and follow the courts lead.

 

I wonder if you could go to the press.....

 

The lawyer will handle some of that. I don't know if when the establishment circles the wagons, if DEAC will be on the inside or outside of the circle, so I don't know reception at this time.

I have notified several outlets, like this one that published an article about how proud they were of DEAC cracking down on us, to let them know that their article now cites as facts information that DEAC falsified in official reports.

https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/edcentral/new-transparency-cracks-open-black-box-accreditation/

We'll see what comes of it. It is hard to explain how DEAC ruined my life, I have been dealing with the fall out from their public lies for months now. When I went to them for help, they threatened me (in writing which will come out), refused to help me, and immediately put their lawyers on me.

I was not and am not intimidated by them. Where this goes, I do not know.

 

I don't see how this lawsuit will drive DEAC out of business. I'm sure that they have insurance. I'm sure that the award might only be a fraction of the demand if WLC wins.

If the precedent is set that schools can sue their accreditors for breach of contract over this sort of thing then, I would imagine, a lot of schools would take notice. It also wouldn't be shocking to see a number of these cases garner public sympathy.

Think about, for a moment, the delayed accreditation of Florida Polytech. Perhaps there were some legitimate deficiencies and meaningful action was taken to overcome those issues.

But if FPU decided to sue for breach of contract I would imagine that it wouldn't be too hard to whip the public into a frenzy. Why would the state of Florida, with a string of respected schools already under its belt, not qualify for accreditation? And just why, exactly, does the state of Florida require the stamp of approval from this private entity to function as a university?

Slap a political cartoon that shows tax money being thrown into a giant accreditation blender and you have a feature story.

 

It is tempting to want to make this about accreditation, given that is their business. This is, however, about them damaging us when they violated federal law, to include 34 C.F.R. § 602.18(b) ensuring controls against inconsistent application of standards, and 34 C.F.R. § 602.18(d) having a reasonable basis for determining that the information the agency relies on for making accrediting decisions is accurate. I am unfamiliar with the case you cite, but if an accrediting agency violated federal laws in it, it would not be unreasonable to file a complaint.

 

Just something else to point out. They called us William Loveland University twice in the show cause order they sent me. Twice! I equate this to getting the name wrong on a rite of execution. Also, they gave us 28 days in total to respond, however, I was notified the executive director was busy and would not be available for questions for something like a week from our notification. Wrong name and too busy for questions? Jeez.

 

And then when I final get a response? Threat, recuse, lawyer!

 

Sue them into the stone age sir...LOL...

 

In other words, DEAC has all incentive to back off and settle the matter quietly now, in a manner favourable to WLC. They overplayed their hand and could pay the price.

This is what happened in my Ashworth/ Ontario College of ECEs saga. I'm under the impression the first literate people who took a look on pages and pages of stuff we submitted (BTW Dr. Bear: thank you for your letter, sir!) were their lawyers, once the claim was filed to Ontario Divisional Court. The matter got resolved in days.

 

I scanned through the legal filing, I'll read it thoroughly when I have the time and a distraction-free environment.

One thing that caught my eye was the criticism of the site visit team, especially Susan Chiaramonte. I thought the reference to her E.J.D. from Concord Law School as a "law" degree (in quotations) was an unnecessary and cheap shot, especially considering that Concord is regionally-accredited.

Also, according to her LinkedIn page, she was the director of accreditation & licensing and academic vice-president of Harrison Middleton University, so I think attacking her credibility may blow up in WLC's face if it goes to trial.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/susanchiaramonte

 

In a situation like this does CHEA/DOE throw DEAC under the bus or is it a "send lawyers, guns and money" thing?

 

Consider the audience.

A bunch of lawyers and a judge, all of whom presumably graduated from ABA accredited law schools.

It sort of reminds me of that drug commercial blowup with that guy who invented an artificial heart, Robert Jarvik. Regulators freaked out because he was identified as "Doctor" and appeared to be dispensing medical advice. He had a medical degree but never completed a residency and thus was never licensed. He went straight into research. His opinion on medical matters is obviously valid. But the outcry was sufficient to get them to pull the commercials.

Not saying it's right or wrong, mind you. But if DEAC threatened the accreditation of WLC on the basis of its on site team and misconstrued the college's capabilities then I'd say an errant set of quotes should be the least of their worries.

 

One of the great things about the 7th Amendment is that it doesn't matter what the judge or the lawyers think, it only matters what the jury thinks.

One thing I know is juries, and juries pick up on that stuff. They hate elitism, and they generally don't like lawyers. In the case of the Jarvik Heart, I seriously doubt that the public was polled about those commercials, only the regulators.

I'm not passing judgment on the validity of the suit itself, and I have no dog in the fight, I just think that WLC's lawyer didn't do his research before he tossed that unnecessary and petty shot. I don't see it playing well with a jury.