Consumer Law LibrarySearchBy decadeBy respondentBy topicBy outcomeDataAbout

Weaver Airline Personnel School, Inc

Volume 88 · 88 F.T.C. 212

Citation
88 F.T.C. 212
Docket
C-2638
Complaint
1975-02-13
Decision
1976-08-03
Document type
modifying order
Case type
consumer protection
Statutes
FTC Act (section 5)
Industry
airline personnel training
Outcome
modified
Relief
redress; recordkeeping
Commission counsel
Walter E. Diercks and Lawrence M. Hodapp
Respondent counsel
Charles Edward Fairfax, III, Cahill, Gordon & Reindel, New York City
Source
Original volume PDF
Original PDF
This decision as a PDF

Cite this decision

Weaver Airline Personnel School, Inc, 88 F.T.C. 212 (1976). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v088-0015

Report an error in this record (decision id v088-0015)

Order status: modified (still in effect) Commission order action. Sunset may be extended by the latest qualifying federal-court complaint alleging an order violation; complaints, dismissal/appeal outcomes, and respondent-specific extensions are not fully tracked.

Cited by 0 later FTC decisions

Cites

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF WEAVER AIRLINE PERSONNEL SCHOOL, INC.,ET AL. MODIFYING ORDER IN REGARD TO ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT Docket C-2638. Complaint, Feb. 18, 1975 — Modifying order, Aug. 3, 1976 Order modifying an earlier order dated Feb. 13, 1975, 40 F.R. 15872, 85 F.T.C. 287, adds to Paragraph 12(2)(c) of the order the provision that if money required to be deposited in the Escrow Funds cannot be distributed, respondent must make direct pro rata payments to eligible students within 60 days. Appearances For the Commission: Walter E. Diercks and Lawrence M. Hodapp. For the respondents: Charles Edward Fairfax, III, Cahill, Gordon & Reindel, New York City.

ORDER MODIFYING ORDER To CEASE AND DESIST AND ORDER DISCONTINUING STAY On May 18, 1976 [87 F.T.C.1288], the Commission issued an order to show cause why the Commission’s order to cease and desist, issued February 13, 1975 [85 F.T.C. 237], in this proceeding, should not be altered and modified by language specified in the order. The modification was proposed to make clear that respondent General Educational Services Corporation’s obligation to pay restitution would not be affected by the removal of monies from the escrow account which will be funded by certain students of respondent Weaver Airline Personnel School, Inc. Respondents, in their answer to the order to show cause, indicate that they and Commission’s staff have negotiated a modification that differs from the modification proposed in the order to show cause by providing that respondent General Educational Services Corporation “shall make direct pro rata payments to” eligible Weaver students “if any of the sums required to be deposited into the Escrow Funds have been removed or cannot be distributed.” The modification proposed in the order to show cause was not so specific, providing that General Educational Services Corporation “shall assure * * * that the total sums required be deposited into the Escrow Fund for restitution are paid.” We agree that the modification recommended by respondents is preferable, and we will order that the Commission’s order to cease and desist be modified by the language recommended in respondents’ answer to the order to show cause. Accordingly, it is ordered, That the following language be added to Paragraph 12(2){e) of the order:

WEAVER AIRLINE PERSONNEL SCHOOL, INC., ET AL. 213 212 Modifying Order Provided, however, That if, other than with the express written consent of the Federal Trade Commission, any of the sums required to be deposited in the Escrow Funds have been removed or cannot be distributed, then within sixty (60) days after the final date established for submission of student requests for restitution under this Paragraph, respondent General Educational Services Corporation shall make direct pro rata payments to the eligible Weaver students described in this Paragraph in the same amounts that each such eligible student would have received had such payments been made from the Escrow Funds, but the total amount so paid shall not exceed the total amount required to be deposited in the Escrow Funds. The Commission further ordered on May 18, 1976, the reopening of this proceeding so as to stay and suspend enforcement of compliance with the notification provision of Paragraph 12 of the order of February 13, 1975. Because the obligation of General Educational Services Corporation has now been clarified, the stay and suspension of compliance is no longer necessary and compliance will be required. Accordingly, it is ordered, that the stay and suspension of compliance with Paragraph 12 of the order of February 18, 1975 be, and it hereby is, discontinued.

Complaint 88 F.T.C.

← 88 F.T.C. 210 · 88 F.T.C. 214 →