Playing Hardball with Multiple Deposits

It's not uncommon for applicants to put down deposits at multiple schools. Sometimes there are good reasons: maybe your spouse needs to find out whether he can relocate to a different branch office, or you might need to stay close to home if your dad's health takes a turn for the worse.

Often, though, there's no good reason: many applicants have access to all the information they would
want or need to make a decision by May 1, and they just want more time to
agonize over their decision some more. Closing doors can be scary, but there comes a time when you just have to pick a horse.

Multiple deposits drive admissions officers completely batty. They have to figure out how many people are actually going to show up at orientation, and in a world of multiple deposits, they can't just look at the number of people who have sent in checks. (That's one of the reasons waitlists have grown grotesquely deep.) Every empty seat is a huge revenue hit for the school, so no school wants to be undersubscribed. I've been there, and I feel their pain.

It's therefore not surprising to me that some schools have started playing hardball with multiple deposits.

From Columbia Law School's admitted students website: We cannot support the practice of placing deposits at multiple law schools. Therefore, if you decide to hold a place at Columbia, we ask that you refrain from doing the same at other law schools. Should we discover that a candidate has made commitments to multiple law schools, Columbia reserves the right to revoke our offer of admission.From the University of Chicago Law School's offer letter:We believe that applicants should have at any time only one deposit or letter of intent to enroll at another school unless there are substantial reasons why an applicant cannot make a decision among outstanding offers of admission.... The Law School will contact individuals who have multiple deposits as of June 15 to discuss their situation and their place in the Class of 2011 may be in jeopardy. [Bold in the original]From NYU's enrollment form:___ I plan to enroll at NYU School of Law in Fall 2008. I have no commitment to attend another law school, have not deferred enrollment at another law school, will not apply to another law school, and have withdrawn from other law schools to which I was admitted. [Bold in the original]Given the difficulties that multiple deposits pose for schools, I wouldn't have any problem with those policies but for the fact that LSAC's own rules prohibit them.

From page 4 of the LSAC Statement of Good Admission and Financial Aid Practices 2007-2008:

Except under binding early decision plans, every accepted applicant should be free to accept a new offer from a school even though a deposit has been paid to another school.That's what lawyers like to call "plain English." No ambiguity there.

What does that mean for you? Ultimately LSAC is just the sum of its member law schools, so don't look to them to slap any wrists here.

These threats against applicants -- to put their offers in jeopardy if they exercise their express right under LSAC rules -- are distasteful and hypocritical, but there's probably not much applicants can do about it. You may ask yourself why you should take any other LSAC rules seriously -- and there are many -- when the schools themselves don't, but, alas, you have no leverage here, and no real recourse.

May 1 is coming up. It's time to pick your horse.