The Trump U. lawsuit in Texas
Curious actions
Regarding “Trump U. lawsuit and Texas” (Page A15, May 4), I read David Morales’ letter on how the Texas attorney general’s Consumer Protection Division handled the Trump U. investigation, with Trump U. eventually disbanding operations in Texas.
Morales went on to say their office’s work “served our Texas consumers well.” Really? I fail to see how allowing Trump U. to leave Texas with all the profits it got from Texas consumers from its alleged deceptive practices was a positive. It is akin to allowing a burglar to leave with the money and goods it took from a home, as long as he agrees not to break into the same house again. There was a proposed $5.4 million settlement which was nixed, so obviously the investigation had value and could benefit those consumers wronged.
Morales went on to say the consumers could still request a refund or go to court. Chances on getting a refund from a company that allegedly set out to separate the consumer from his money are quite slim. To go to court would mean the consumer would have to spend more of his own money and hire an attorney, starting its own investigation at square one, without being privy to facts and conclusions of the attorney general’s sevenmonth investigation, which ended prematurely.
We have recently learned more about how Trump U. operated in the past, which is rather disconcerting given the wrist slap it received. I don’t know if this is another example of how different the ultra-rich are treated, but surely Texans deserved better.
John Fisch, Houston