ILNews

ITT agrees to pay Sallie Mae $46M to settle suit

Scott Olson
January 8, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Carmel-based ITT Educational Services Inc., one of the largest operators of for-profit colleges in the nation, has agreed to pay Sallie Mae Corp. $46 million to settle litigation related to a loan agreement between the two parties.

Wall Street reacted unfavorably to the settlement Monday, as ITT shares fell to as low as $15 each in mid-morning trading, shedding as much as 22 percent of their value. The stock traded for more than $66 a share less than 10 months ago.

Reuters reported the settlement Friday, following ITT’s announcement of the agreement in a Dec. 28 regulatory filing.

Sallie Mae, the largest U.S. student loan provider, filed suit against ITT in July 2011, alleging that it breached the terms by failing to pay some amounts on time under the agreement signed in July 2007, according to Reuters.

ITT makes agreements with some lenders, including Sallie Mae, to provide private education loans to its students.

The $46 million payment will be made by Jan. 29, ITT said in the filing. The agreement contains no admission of liability by either party.

ITT said it will record an after-tax charge of $13.2 million, or about 56 cents per share, during the quarter ended Dec. 31.

Analysts were expecting ITT to report a fourth-quarter profit of $1.88 per share, according to Thomson Reuters.

ITT has more than 140 campuses across the country. The average cost of an ITT associate's degree program is $45,000, but scholarships and grants reduce that cost on average to $27,000.

ITT's enrollment figures have been sinking over the past year, mostly because of tougher federal rules involving recruitment.

Most for-profit educators have been suffering similar fortunes. Enrollments have tumbled across the industry, also in part because of a natural receding of the wave of students who entered for-profit colleges during the recession that ran from 2007 to 2009.

But more significantly, government investigations of the industry have exposed questionable recruiting practices, sky-high student debt loads and low graduation rates. New rules placed on for-profit colleges by the Obama administration threatened to yank federal student loans for programs whose students failed to pay down their debt loads.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT