How much is it reasonable for training institutions to deduct fees, and is it reasonable to deduct 2

Generally speaking, 20% is deducted. Your situation is unreasonable.

In addition, in accordance with the requirements of relevant national policies, training institutions shall not make one-time payments.

Party B collects or indirectly collects fees for a period of more than 3 months; Where online training institutions charge fees based on class hours, they must not charge more than 60 class hours at a time for each subject.

This provision is to reduce the prepayment business model.

The resulting refund disputes have also forced training institutions to improve the quality of training to attract students to renew, but there are still training institutions playing the sideline.

Illegal fees, such as signing four contracts for a year's fees, and some students' parents are bewitched by the training institution's discounts and cooperate with the training institution's illegal operation.

The text of the model contract clearly mentions "Party A.

It has the right to collect training fees in accordance with relevant national policies and regulations. After Party A collects the training fee, it shall issue a formal invoice to Party B in a timely manner", which is to clearly inform parents of the national regulations, and also require the training institutions to strictly implement the regulations.

It shouldn't be deducted, first, did you sign a similar refund agreement when you signed up? Second, even if you sign it, is there a legal basis for this agreement? Even if there were, you're sure to find a loophole.

This kind of regulation is formulated by themselves, and there is no legal basis, and if you don't give you a refund, they will make trouble.

30% is usually so much, after class, if the school is because of the deduction of 30%, if you haven't gone to class, up to 5%, we are in the training industry.

Refund according to the class hours that have already been attended, and more than 30% can not be refunded.

The 20% deduction for the refund of the training institution is reasonable.

Regarding the issue of refund deduction and handling fee, after signing the contract, if there is a clear provision, the 10% refund fee is reasonable, of course, the maximum cannot exceed 30%, so this also depends on how much service the registered course enjoys, and what is the current progress, whether the party has taken classes, how long has been attended, and whether it has enjoyed the service that has been registered.

Institutional refunds:

First, if a refund is requested due to reasons attributable to the school, the remaining amount must be refunded.

Second, before the start of the course, for irresistible reasons, such as issuing admission notices from various institutions that recognize academic qualifications.

or if the notice of enlistment or the application for dust refund due to serious illness or other legitimate reasons, and the refund is made, 5% of the handling fee will be deducted, and the remaining fee will be refunded.

Third, the content of the agreement must be clearly read when signing, and it is recommended to retain evidence of rights protection. If there is an agreement on refund, the agreement signed by the user shall prevail (except for invalid clauses). In particular, the contract of the ** education platform should be looked at in detail.

The 20% deduction for the refund of the training institution is unreasonable. From the point of view of fairness, it is clearly unreasonable. The student is unwilling to continue the training, resulting in the inability to perform the education and training contract and being forced to terminate it.

The normal solution is to refund the training fee for the consumer's failure to attend the course, and the consumer may need to bear a certain percentage of liquidated damages if the education and training contract stipulates in special circumstances.

Whether an educational institution can deduct the service fee separately needs to understand the specific content and nature of the service corresponding to the service fee.

Training institutions should pay attention to the matters of spikes and branches for refundsIf the student is unable to complete the study plan due to the reasons of the training institution, the student requests to withdraw from the course or refund the fee, and the training institution shall refund the remaining fee. Before the training institution starts the course, if the student submits an application for withdrawal and refund to the training institution for irresistible reasons, the training institution shall deduct the handling fee according to the agreement and then refund the remaining fee. The agreement on refund is generally subject to the agreement signed between the student and the training institution.

It depends on whether the contract between the two parties has a refund and deduction clause.

If the training institution withdraws from the school due to its own reasons, the training institution shall refund the remaining expenses after deducting the actual expenses incurred, and if the trainee proposes to withdraw from the school, the training institution shall handle it in accordance with the provisions of the training contract, and if there is no agreement in the training contract or the agreement is not clear, the remaining expenses after deducting the actual expenses shall be refunded.

When facing refund disputes, the training institution should actively deal with communication, and strive to help students solve the problem to avoid refunds, and if students strongly request refunds, they should be handled in a timely manner in accordance with the standard refund process to avoid delays in refunds and secondary contradictions.

There is a legal relationship between the trainee and the training institution for training services.

Both parties shall sign a training contract to clarify their respective rights and obligations. In the training contract, stipulating the refund conditions, refund ratio, refund time and other matters is also a way to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the training institution. If the two parties do not agree on the relevant matters of the refund or the agreement is unclear, in the event of a dispute, they can only refund the corresponding fees for the remaining class hours in proportion, or even in full, which will bring greater losses to the training institution.

It should be noted that clauses such as "no refunds will be made after the start of the course" and "refunds are not allowed after the contract is signed" are overlord clauses.

The training contract should avoid similar clauses, but it can be specified in the contract that the fee cannot be refunded, such as the long-term class starts until three-quarters of the course, regardless of whether the class is attended or not.

In fact, I think it's more reasonable, after all, people have also paid a lot of things, that is, you are training here, but you don't finish the training, and then you still need to get a refund, and others deduct a little related hardship fee, which is still more reasonable, 20% is not a lot, so it is more reasonable, I personally feel that it is more reasonable.

According to the provisions of the Civil Code on liquidated damages, the upper limit is generally not more than 30% of the actual loss. So from that point of view, it makes sense.

If the training provider is unable to attend the course, the full remaining amount must be refunded. If the refund is due to force majeure of the student, the institution can deduct 5% of the fee and refund the remaining amount. If you do not attend the class, you can keep the relevant evidence and go through the legal process, and you can also get a full refund.

Specifically, it depends on the signed contract, but if the contract form is invalid, it will also have an impact.

If the other party is in default, you can ask them for a full refund through legal means

The 20% deduction for the refund of the training institution is as follows:

In general, a 20% deduction is not reasonable. Specifically, the 20% deduction is too high, but it also needs to be determined in light of the actual situation. For example, if the contract specifies in advance the relevant deduction clause and percentage, then it is indisputable that the training institution will comply with the clause.

On the other hand, if the training institution deducts the money without permission, it can file a complaint.

Chaos in training institutions:

Multi-head management is actually unmanaged. Dong Shengzu, director of the Institute of Private Education of the Shanghai Academy of Education and Sciences, said that the operation of a training institution involves education, civil affairs, industry and commerce, finance, construction and other first-class departments and industry associations, but the vast majority of training institutions are beyond the scope of operation.

It is not included in the administrative license.

Range. However, the education department does not have the power to intervene in its business behavior, so it has formed a blind spot in supervision.

Charge high tuition fees in advance. After visiting a number of training institutions, the reporter found that their tuition fees are usually paid in advance across the year. Ms. Chang, a parent, said: "According to the ** calculation given by the training center, it must be a cost-effective long-term class, and it is tens of thousands of yuan for just one report." ”

The 20% deduction for the refund of the training institution is unreasonable. Regarding the refund deduction fee, after signing the contract, if there is a clear stipulation, the 10% refund fee is reasonable, of course, the maximum cannot exceed 30%, so this also depends on how much service the course you have signed up for, and what the current progress is, whether you have taken classes, how long you have been attending, and whether you have enjoyed the services that you have already applied for.

Precautions. Consumers are paying in advance.

When making a purchase, you should sign a contract with the merchant, which specifies how long the merchant should refund in case of a refund to avoid unnecessary disputes.

Consumers can issue a letter, indicating the specific time and content of the request for refund, urging the merchant to refund within 15-20 days from the date of receipt of the letter, and the consumer has the right to take proper legal means to protect their rights and interests.

The 20% deduction for the refund of the training institution is unreasonable. Regarding the refund deduction fee, after signing the contract, if there is a clear stipulation, the 10% refund fee is reasonable, of course, the maximum cannot exceed 30%, so this also depends on how much service the course you have signed up for, and what the current progress is, whether you have taken classes, how long you have been attending, and whether you have enjoyed the services that you have already applied for.

Precautions. Consumers are paying in advance.

When changing consumer shirts, a contract should be signed with the merchant, and the contract should specify how long the merchant should refund in case of refund, so as to avoid the necessary disputes over not making dates.

Consumers can issue a letter stating the specific time and content of the request or judgment for refund, urging the merchant to refund within 15-20 days from the date of receipt of the letter, and the consumer has the right to take proper legal means to protect his rights and interests.