Double Depositing

<p>And let’s consider wait lists for a moment.</p>

<p>Schools consider it perfectly OK to forfeit one deposit and make a new one when a wait list opening comes up. Why? Because this serves the school’s interests first and foremost. </p>

<p>Yet, from the POV of the school that has a deposit but no enrollee, the impact is the same: A deposit made but no student shows up. </p>

<p>I ask those that talk about binding contracts and so forth to reconcile how a WL no show is OK but a double deposit no show is not? Is it only because the school says one is OK but the other is not? What about those who said “if you make a deposit you’re obligated to go” or words to that effect? How are the two situations different?</p>

<p>For the record, though, D did not double deposit. Her choice was clear. She was lucky.</p>

<p>Schools are trying to be reasonable (believe it or not) to allow students to back out if he gets off a WL, that’s is also why schools have a long WL to make sure they get enough students to fill the spot. </p>

<p>The analogy I have made in previous year is - it’s like an engagement. Just because you are engaged it doesn’t mean you need to go through with the marriage. But it is expected that you are only to be engaged to one person at a time. Contractually it is understood that you are making a commitment to one person, not multiple people. It is not spilled out, but for thousand of years it is how we have operated.</p>

<p>I think all of us would be very upset if a school were to tell us on the orientation day that there is no room for us because they have made commitment to too many students.</p>

<p>Thank you for your post, oldfort. I was feeling lonely ;)</p>

<p>I was watching Valentine’s Day on my computer when I posted that.:)</p>

<p>Your analogy seems false to me because the commitment to a school that has waitlisted you is neither more nor less moral than one that has admitted you. Newmassdad has, I believe, defined the moral dimensions elegantly. Let’s try for a better analogy. I think buying a house is good. It involves financial commitments of the same order of magnitude and gravity as college. One puts down non-refundable earnest money to tentatively lock ownership. Nevertheless, both sides continue to reserve cancellation rights under certain conditions, like failure of home inspection or failure of the buyer to qualify for a mortgage, but nowhere is one forbidden to forfeit one’s earnest money and contract for a different house. To underscore this, I would also mention one key point that newmassdad did not make. When the colleges actually want a true commitment, as in early decision, they make it abundantly clear and they act in concert. If you try to cheat they all throw you overboard. If they wanted to tell regular decision candidates that the deposit is binding they just have to say so. They could also make the deposit larger to make it more painful to back out. The reason they don’t is obvious: because of waitlist issues and the need to make yield. One of our waitlist institutions even told us that if we switched to them and had to forfeit our deposit they would waive their deposit. Doesn’t seem like they were showing much respect for our commitment to the competing institution, does it? All in all, these are NOT binding contracts. They are based on penalty based commitments, which means that they are expected to fail a certain percentage of the time. Double depositing is a very expensive way to buy time and security, so I doubt it will ever become a really serious problem for most intitutions, and I am guessing that is another reason why most of them don’t try to formally forbid the practice.</p>

<p>How much money do you put down when you buy a house? 5%, 10%, 25%? It really depends on the market. Most sellers require enough downpayment in case a buyer were to walk away from a deal, and the seller would be compensated for possible lost of opportunity. </p>

<p>How much do you put down for college? Not even 1%. It is not difficult to understand why they could afford to do that. The day everyone starts to put down multiple deposits then colleges will ask for higher deposit. How would that serve anyone interest?</p>

<p>“… that’s is also why schools have a long WL to make sure they get enough students to fill the spot.”</p>

<p>Waitlists are far longer that what is needed to handle summer melt; they’re so long because they need depth. E.g., if fewer HS newspaper editors than they want send in a deposit, they need to admit more from the WL. Same for linemen and oboe players. They do have to be care not to admit too many overall or they’ll be overcrowded in dorms and classrooms.</p>

<p>I’m wondering how many LAWSUITS have been filed against schools who rescind an admission due to double-depositing. It’s an especially harsh penalty considering that if a student double deposited at two schools and both rescinded the admission, the student would be totally out of luck for the entire school year. Since the May 1st deadline would likely have passed, it would be too late to register fo any other school (community colleges excepted). It’s hard to imagine that this has actually happened, but the threat of it would keep me from considering double-depositing. It’s a bell you couldn’t unring.</p>

<p>I’m rather disgusted to see some of the obnoxiousness played out in this conversation. Everyone DOES and rightly SHOULD want the best for their kids but in the end, if your kid makes several deposits it doesn’t so much screw over a college as it does screw over other students sitting on waiting lists waiting for good news. It’s especially awful for those who are waiting and waiting at a college which never gets notification from the multiple depositors and presumes that space is filled until late into the summer.</p>

<p>Who suffers? Maybe there is an empty bed or maybe not, but it is likely a spot which could have been available to another student.</p>

<p>It is an agreement and in some cases colleges do have formal expectations about commitments. </p>

<p>Somewhat like the disciplinary questions which upset so many, parents here often want every child but their own scrutinized closely because they (appropriately) want their child in as safe and sane an environment as possible but want their own child’s youthful indiscretions completely forgiven. </p>

<p>How are we teaching any social responsibility when everything is “me first”. I’d rather have my kid in a school where there is some sense of a larger social responsibility. Thinking about multiple deposits as somehow getting even with the colleges is a pretty unfortunate perspective and a truly lousy lesson to teach.</p>

<p>“Who suffers? Maybe there is an empty bed or maybe not, but it is likely a spot which could have been available to another student.”</p>

<p>It just doesn’t work like that. Schools plan for summer melt in their yield calculations; they expect it. It has been this way for years. If an increasing number of kids double- or multiple-deposit, schools will adjust their calculations accordingly.</p>

<p>This is in no way condoning the practice, but it just isn’t harmful.</p>

<p>You know, I was just arguing to a friend that our generation really isn’t that selfish and hedonistic. That while our idea of doing the right thing may be different than it used to be, most of us are still willing to do the right thing over the thing which personally benefits us.</p>

<p>Then I see people argue that it’s perfectly justifiable to promise to attend multiple colleges, because what if you can’t decide yet? And I begin to wonder if I’m right.</p>

<p>Colleges plan for summer melt when and if people get off WL. They DO NOT plan for people doing multiple deposits. If people start to do that, then colleges would need to start to plan for that, and that is going to impose extra costs on everyone. Every option costs money.</p>

<p>When my son went through the admission season, he rec’d an acceptance from a Big 10 U early in Feb or March. We had to send off a small housing deposit $50 to get him in line for housing, and it was refundable if he didn’t enroll. It was not an enrollment deposit. Later he was admitted to a U he preferred… and enrolled there by the May 1 deadline. The Big 10 U refunded us. Are you certain these housing deposits are non refundable if the student doesn’t enroll? It might be worth checking.</p>

<p>I think double depositing is just postponing the day of decision making. As of May 1 the student should have all the information in hand as to acceptances and financial aid. Why enroll at two places? What is going to change? The only rationale I could see is in the event of a shaky job situation for a parent that might change over the summer. Otherwise, I think it’s best to make a commitment and end what is generally an anxiety provoking process that has been ongoing since the second semester of junior year… a year and a half.</p>

<p>Amarkov- I haven’t seen anybody condoning the practice for those that can’t decide yet. I have seen those condoning the practice to secure housing before it runs out or to secure a spot in case financial aid doesn’t come through elsewhere. Argue against that if you wish, but don’t use straw men here.</p>

<p>AnagramPanda - go back and read some other posts. There are many adults saying it is ok to do multiple posting because they need to look after best interest of their kids.</p>

<p>“Colleges plan for summer melt when and if people get off WL. They DO NOT plan for people doing multiple deposits.”</p>

<p>But colleges don’t know the reason someone doesn’t show up (though some may give an unreliable reason); they just plan for what they know historically happens.</p>

<p>Historically, most people only do one deposit at a time. Our GC(most GCs) will only send the final transcript to ONE college, and applicant’s acceptance is contingent on the final transcript. That should tell you whether it is moral, correct, or legal to do multiple deposits.</p>

<p>look at it this way. </p>

<p>What if your local real estate board announced that it was unethical to make a deposit on a house but then walk away from the deal because (1) you found big problems in the inspection or (2) you found a better place and were willing to forgo your deposit. </p>

<p>But, at the same time, the listing agreements, and the “standard” contracts did not change. In other words, the real estate board made a policy that suited them, but not the buyer.</p>

<p>Would you feel “bound” by their policy?</p>

<p>Now, take NACAC. Lets start with the fact that NACAC does not include a voice from parents or from students. From their website:

. Next, lets look at the fact that membership is only open to admissions professionals in secondary and higher ed. Then, observe the fact that half its current board is made up of higher ed professionals.</p>

<p>Is there then any doubt who NACAC serves? Is there then any doubt that its code of conduct was developed.</p>

<p>Having said that, let us now take a look at what NACAC ACTUALLY SAYS.</p>

<p>On page 15 of their code of conduct FOR MEMBERS (no parents allowed!) it says, at item III A 13,

Let us ignore the tortured etymology here (how can not doing something indicate an intent to do something?) and focus on who it is directed at. Hint: not parents. Not students. </p>

<p>So, if anyone truly thinks a “Statement of Principles of Good Practice” for members of a professional association should be binding on non-members, as well as non-members who are not even mentioned in the Statement of Principles, heck, more power to you. </p>

<p>But with all due respect to the Washington Post, who published the article referenced in this thread, and of which I am a loyal subscriber (my coffee does not taste good until my Post has arrived!), some folks (including Post authors) should do their homework, because I don’t see how they get from there to here. </p>

<p>I fully support excommunicating (er, disenrolling from NACAC) any counselor who advises double depositing. That appears to be a condition of membership. But my kid is not a member. Neither am I. So if my kid were to double deposit with a check signed by me, neither of us would be violating any ethical, moral or legal code as near as I can see.</p>

<p>newmassdad - and all of us would need to pick tab for your sense of entitlement.</p>

<p>My point was the inability to unring the recsision bell. Can you imagine the heartbreak for a kid who’s worked night and day for admission to a great school and ends up with nowhere to go and no way to repair the damage? The specter of rescision must be considered seriously.</p>