Lawsuits when you don't attend

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Email sent out to parents tonight from new HoS

I want to make you aware of an article in the Washington Post today that reports how Sandy Spring Friends School pursued legal action for non-payment against a preschool parent who accepted, but ultimately did not enroll, at our school.

Though financial stewardship is a priority for our school, the approach taken to resolve this matter at the time by the prior administration was misguided, and does not reflect the community values of SSFS. I have contacted the parent to apologize on behalf of the School, and to let her know that SSFS will not be seeking any tuition payments from her.

While the staff members involved in pursuing legal action in this case are no longer employed at the School, Sandy Spring Friends School is now reviewing how and why the decision to pursue this legal action was made. In the coming weeks, I will also be studying and revising admissions contract procedures and business office practices.

As I begin my new leadership of the School, I am committed to ensuring that Sandy Spring Friends School’s practices align with our founding Quaker values.

I mean…they only just now made this decision? After the article came out? Ok.

[Anonymous]

Sandy springs showing the world they are a fake Quaker school. No wonder they ran out of money

[Anonymous]

Sidwell, a real Quaker school, should reach out to this mom and offer her child a full ride https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/08/03/private-schools-lawsuits-families/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sandy springs showing the world they are a fake Quaker school. No wonder they ran out of money

One spring, many Friends. ✌🏻

[Anonymous]

Good for the current leadership for doing the right thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Email sent out to parents tonight from new HoS

I want to make you aware of an article in the Washington Post today that reports how Sandy Spring Friends School pursued legal action for non-payment against a preschool parent who accepted, but ultimately did not enroll, at our school.

Though financial stewardship is a priority for our school, the approach taken to resolve this matter at the time by the prior administration was misguided, and does not reflect the community values of SSFS. I have contacted the parent to apologize on behalf of the School, and to let her know that SSFS will not be seeking any tuition payments from her.

While the staff members involved in pursuing legal action in this case are no longer employed at the School, Sandy Spring Friends School is now reviewing how and why the decision to pursue this legal action was made. In the coming weeks, I will also be studying and revising admissions contract procedures and business office practices.

As I begin my new leadership of the School, I am committed to ensuring that Sandy Spring Friends School’s practices align with our founding Quaker values.

Oh wow unexpected happy ending. Self-serving but still happy for the mom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sandy springs showing the world they are a fake Quaker school. No wonder they ran out of money

Well friend, clearly you are not a Quaker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t sign contracts if you can’t pay your bills.

Unsophisticated people are not really able to understand a contract like that especially if it is very unintuitive. The mom says that she assumed it would be something more like a month or two of tuition. She also thought that it would be reasonable to make her acceptance contingent on the aid package - and the fact that they made her sign the agreement without knowing the aid was pretty exploitative. Even colleges don’t do it that way.

The mom said that she didn't read the contract. It doesn't matter if it was "unintuitive" if she didn't read it. She assumed it said something that it didn't. Not sure how that's the school's fault.

The article also said that there was an opportunity for her to withdraw after the financial aid decision, but that she didn't do so. Again, not sure why the school should be responsible for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a huge piece of information missing from this article. SSFS does not start giving financial aid until Kindergarten. This is stated on their financial aid page and has been for years. This child would have been in PK, so financial aid was never going to be an option. Between the parent's lack of reading the contract before signing, and an apparent lack of financial aid research, I fail to see how the school is at fault.

No doubt that the school is legally correct and that the parent was unsophisticated and naive about how things work. But that doesn't change the school's moral culpability, IMO.

In order to be a good Quaker, one has to allow counterparties to contracts to breach them with impunity? Wow, that's rough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Email sent out to parents tonight from new HoS

I want to make you aware of an article in the Washington Post today that reports how Sandy Spring Friends School pursued legal action for non-payment against a preschool parent who accepted, but ultimately did not enroll, at our school.

Though financial stewardship is a priority for our school, the approach taken to resolve this matter at the time by the prior administration was misguided, and does not reflect the community values of SSFS. I have contacted the parent to apologize on behalf of the School, and to let her know that SSFS will not be seeking any tuition payments from her.

While the staff members involved in pursuing legal action in this case are no longer employed at the School, Sandy Spring Friends School is now reviewing how and why the decision to pursue this legal action was made. In the coming weeks, I will also be studying and revising admissions contract procedures and business office practices.

As I begin my new leadership of the School, I am committed to ensuring that Sandy Spring Friends School’s practices align with our founding Quaker values.

I mean…they only just now made this decision? After the article came out? Ok.

Hasn’t their leadership almost
completely turned over since they went to court?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t sign contracts if you can’t pay your bills.

Unsophisticated people are not really able to understand a contract like that especially if it is very unintuitive. The mom says that she assumed it would be something more like a month or two of tuition. She also thought that it would be reasonable to make her acceptance contingent on the aid package - and the fact that they made her sign the agreement without knowing the aid was pretty exploitative. Even colleges don’t do it that way.

The mom said that she didn't read the contract. It doesn't matter if it was "unintuitive" if she didn't read it. She assumed it said something that it didn't. Not sure how that's the school's fault.

The article also said that there was an opportunity for her to withdraw after the financial aid decision, but that she didn't do so. Again, not sure why the school should be responsible for that.

Because the premise of such contracts that bind you to pay for the whole year, even if you do not attend, or pay a deposit, is exploitative in the extreme. The parent's mistake highlights the root of the problem, which is not of her making, but rather of the greedy and grasping maneuvers that many private schools resort to.

[Anonymous]

I just read this story and was outraged and disgusted. A school that couldn't pay its own bills is chasing some poor woman with no resources whatsoever for a school where her child never attended? Glad to hear from the comments above that the school's new leadership reversed this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Email sent out to parents tonight from new HoS

I want to make you aware of an article in the Washington Post today that reports how Sandy Spring Friends School pursued legal action for non-payment against a preschool parent who accepted, but ultimately did not enroll, at our school.

Though financial stewardship is a priority for our school, the approach taken to resolve this matter at the time by the prior administration was misguided, and does not reflect the community values of SSFS. I have contacted the parent to apologize on behalf of the School, and to let her know that SSFS will not be seeking any tuition payments from her.

While the staff members involved in pursuing legal action in this case are no longer employed at the School, Sandy Spring Friends School is now reviewing how and why the decision to pursue this legal action was made. In the coming weeks, I will also be studying and revising admissions contract procedures and business office practices.

As I begin my new leadership of the School, I am committed to ensuring that Sandy Spring Friends School’s practices align with our founding Quaker values.

I mean…they only just now made this decision? After the article came out? Ok.

Hasn’t their leadership almost
completely turned over since they went to court?

Yes, but the new leadership would have been well aware of the situation. It’s not like they found out about it when the article went to press. They easily could have chosen not to pursue payment from this woman before now. They’re only doing the right thing now because of the negative publicity from the article.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t sign contracts if you can’t pay your bills.

Unsophisticated people are not really able to understand a contract like that especially if it is very unintuitive. The mom says that she assumed it would be something more like a month or two of tuition. She also thought that it would be reasonable to make her acceptance contingent on the aid package - and the fact that they made her sign the agreement without knowing the aid was pretty exploitative. Even colleges don’t do it that way.

The mom said that she didn't read the contract. It doesn't matter if it was "unintuitive" if she didn't read it. She assumed it said something that it didn't. Not sure how that's the school's fault.

The article also said that there was an opportunity for her to withdraw after the financial aid decision, but that she didn't do so. Again, not sure why the school should be responsible for that.

Because the premise of such contracts that bind you to pay for the whole year, even if you do not attend, or pay a deposit, is exploitative in the extreme. The parent's mistake highlights the root of the problem, which is not of her making, but rather of the greedy and grasping maneuvers that many private schools resort to.

If you think about this honestly for about 3 second, you should be able to figure out why it is entirely appropriate for someone who accepts a spot at a school to be liable for the entire year's tuition.

Or maybe you won't be able to. But that's on you, not the nature of the contract. It's not a difficult concept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t sign contracts if you can’t pay your bills.

Unsophisticated people are not really able to understand a contract like that especially if it is very unintuitive. The mom says that she assumed it would be something more like a month or two of tuition. She also thought that it would be reasonable to make her acceptance contingent on the aid package - and the fact that they made her sign the agreement without knowing the aid was pretty exploitative. Even colleges don’t do it that way.

Most privates don’t make you sign a contract before you know aid either. I’ve never heard of that. I can’t read the article, but is that really what happened?

I think she didn't understand that aid for preschool didn't exist. And also did not understand that aid package + contract are usually a joint offering, so she signed and -- unfortunately & wrongly -- assumed that she'd get aid.

I feel for her. We didn't get the necessary aid for our kid to continue at her private for the 25-26 year, so did not sign. But we knew the drill and turned down the spot by June 1.