[Resolved] University18 Business School — Refund of 2nd semester Fees | |||
B. Shrikrishna Bhat Ground Floor, Adithi Arcade Advocate Karangalpady, Mangalore Ph:[protected]. Mob:[protected] Date:[protected] To The Director, UBS,MSL,SCO 21,22,Sector-14, Gurgoan-122001, Haryana. Sir, Under instructions from client Mr.Rajendra Halemane,[protected], Behind Babbu Swami Sabha Bhavana, Nanthoor Cross, , Mangalore-575002, I am addressing you as follows; My client is a permanent employee in SBI Life Insurance Co.Ltd. as a Senior Agency Manager. He was very keen in getting an MBA Degree from any recognized university through distance education, as he could not pursue his study as a full time candidate. At the same time surprisingly my client has received a call from you informing and claiming with my client that you are the only institution having tie up with KSOU ( Karnataka State Open University) for MBA professionals. My client being convinced that you have tie up with KSOU and sought for Prospectus. The same has been sent to my client through email attachment. As per the prospectus and on going telephonic conversations you have succeeded in convincing my client for the following . 1. Each student shall get a self learning material package at the beginning of the course 2. Student get access to feature rich on line learning management system, with recorded video lectures and other e-learning contents for the programme. 3 Students shall have regular counseling and teaching sessions. 4. A personal contact programme of six days shall be organized by the institute for each semester. As per the prospectus you have to finish the first semester course by ..2 -2- December 2009. Unfortunately you could not finish the portion even before the examinations. The ways of classes done were irrelevant on the examination point of view. However you have miserably failed to keep most of your promises . My client as per your direction remitted 15,200/-to your account on[protected].Eventhough you tried to commence the on line classes, the classes could not give its effect due to continuous failure of proper infrastructure like frequent audio failure, frequent cancellation of classes, exorbitant delay in supplying the study materials etc. The books were supplied after three months of the commencement semester. You have failed to fulfil the commitment given in the prospectus, o[censored]ploading the recorded class sessions in the web. So that the student who could not attend the classes and also who wants to revise his study can utilise such facility at their leisure hours. Because of all these defects my client could not update his studies and could not attend for the first semester. My client intimated the above facts to you through email on several occasions. But you have failed to respond positively. Even after all these facts you have demanded for the second installment for second semester before finishing of the first semester and before demanding fee for the first semester examination. My client remitted the second installment as per your demand through credit card on[protected]. However till today he has not received any receipt for such payment. The said payment was collected by you in a different name of MSL Learning Systems Pvt. Ltd. By that time my client as already stated could not take the examination due to aforesaid reasons. In fact my client is not liable for payment for the second semester. Hence he requested you to refund the entire amount paid in your favour for the course. For which you have not replied till date. My client believing your promises with an intention to get MBA invested his hard earned money and time which proved to be waste. That you are liable to compensate for the loss suffered by my client because of your false promises, which is estimated at Rs 50,000/- …3 -2- There for you are called upon to pay the said amount within 15 days of the receipt of this notice failing which my client will be constrained to take appropriate legal action against you at your risk as to all costs and consequences. Please Note. Yours faithfully [B. Shrikrishna Bhat] Was this information helpful? | |||
Aug 13, 2020 Complaint marked as Resolved customer support has been notified about the posted complaint. | |||
 7 Comments | |||
Comments
you are a fraud
BEFORE THE D.K. DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MANGALORE.
Com.No.149/2010
BETWEEN:
Rajendra K.Halemane. ` ….Complainant
And
The Director, UBS. …..Opposite party
VERSION STATEMENT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY
The Opposite Party above named begs to submit as follows:
1. The Instituition, in collaboration with Karnataka State Open University, has launched the said Program in an effort to provide quality education at affordable prices to Indian Working Professionals.
The Institution has as such a long and solid background in Quality Education delivered using Technology and Online Education/ E Learning, and has been running, and still runs these programs with various world class Institutions such as IIM Calcutta, IIM Kozhikode, IIT Delhi and XLRI Jamshedpur, for the past 8 years.
2. The Complaint filed by the Complainant is false, frivolous and vexatious and not maintainable in law and facts. The Complainant has enrolled in a Professional Education Course run by UBS, after completing all due diligence on his part. Six months after the commencement of the Course, I, e, after having completed and having availed of half the course, the complainant, by his own admittance, has found himself inadequately prepared to face the examinations, due to lack of time and effort.
He has subsequently sought a refund of fee on a prorate basis, wrongly believing, that he is entitled to a part refund for the remaining portion of the academic year. When denied the same, he has created a false and frivolous case of ‘deficiency of service’ to put legal pressure on the Institution to refund his money.
Both the emails sent by the Complainant to the Institution, the first regarding his inability to attend exams, stating simply
“I am not in a position to appear for the exam to be conducted in this month due to my inability to go through the subjects. Please do the needful.”
And the second, requesting a refund of the fees for the remaining portion of the year, stating
“
As I am not in a position to continue the MBA-Professional - 2009, I am requesting you to refund the 2nd semester fee which has been credited to UBS a/c during Dec.2009 in advance.
“
Emails indicate that the complainant has no issues with any of the services provided, but simply is unable to cope with the requirements of the course. The institution sympathizes with him, but will not accept the complainant maligning the institution just in a ploy to extract an undue and unjust refund.
The two emails are attached
3. The Institution, like most Degree Granting Academic Institutions, work on an Annual Academic Fee basis. Students who drop out in the middle of the year for whatsoever reasons are not entitled to a prorate refund. They ARE allowed to withdraw from such courses, and are then held not liable to pay for SUCCESSIVE YEARS of the course. Similarly, if the candidate does not appear for and fails in a mid-year examination, he IS entitled to continue for the year, and not held back, in line with the ‘Academic Term Year’ concept.
As clearly stated in the Information Prospectus available with the Complainant, and in fact as admitted by the complainant, the complainant is liable to pay the full fee for the Academic Year. Only to facilitate the payments, the students are provided with an installment scheme for payment of their fees. The first installment is paid on joining, and the second installment 3 months after.
Non appearance / Opting out of the second semester would not be a entitlement for the Opposite Party to claim refund of the balance fee, as the commitment made by the complainant is for the whole course and not for the split semesters.
Also clearly stated in the rules section of the Prospectus fees paid are non refundable, and the same has been understood and agreed upon by the Complainant before enrolling for the Program.
4. The candidate has paid his due fee, including the second installment, which was paid on 20th of December 2009.
The second installment was paid by him willingly, and without protest. This can only indicate that he was satisfied with the facilities provided by the Institution, and the progress of the course.
There could have been no undue pressure on the Complainant to pay this second fee, nor threat of legal action from the Institution.
This clearly indicates his allegations berating the ‘deficiency of service’ ranging right from the start of the course to uptil the examinations, as having been fabricated and trumped up as an afterthought.
5. The Complainant hints at or alleges an irregularity in the Institutions (UBS’s) claims of the Program and Course to be recognized by Karnataka State Open University.
Whereas, the Complainant, has in his own submission to the FORUM, enclosed a copy of an email conversation between himself and the Registrar of KSOU, wherein he has, before enrollment, sought to verify the Institutions claims. And the same has been confirmed as to be an authorized institution by the Registrar.
A copy of the said email, as received from the Forum, as a part of the complainant’s submission, is included.
The Institution stands by its claims regarding the Program’s authenticity, and recognition by the Karnataka State Open University.
6. The Complainant alleges an inordinate delay, amounting to more than three (3) months, in the dispatch of courseware and conduct of classes.
The complainant, by his own admittance, has paid the fee amount (directly into the bank account of the Institution) of Rs.15, 200 on the 29th of August, 2009.
The Institution has received his application form after the receipt of the fee, by the first week of September 2009. Thereafter, the Institution has acted swiftly, in verifying and approving the Complainant’s enrollment, and has provided the student access to the Online Class facility in September itself (Schedule Attached), and Access to LMS facility on the 13th of October.
The candidates courseware and Admission letter has been dispatched to him on the 16 of October, 2009, via Blue Dart Couriers, Package AWB No. [protected], and the same has been received by the Complainant on the 19th of October, 2009.
A copy of the Courier Invoice is attached, as well as certificate of delivery from Blue Dart Express Limited is attached
The Forum would agree that an Admission and enrollment to a Masters Degree Program from a Government University is not like purchasing a TV or fridge, and a time of 5-6 weeks to process such an application can be considered fair.
Hence the contentions of the complainant that the Opposite Party had failed to keep up their promises regarding the delivery of Courseware, or a delay of more than three months, is false.
6. The Complaintant also challenges the manner in which the Institution has conducted its online classes, stating ‘The ways the classes done were irrelevant on the examination point of view’.
The Institution has conducted regular classes from very senior faculty, hailing from Institutions such as IIM Calcutta and IISC Bangalore, in an attempt to impart knowledge and skills to Students, not just degrees. Hence, the teaching by the professors are Skill, Academics & Knowledge Oriented, not tuitions to help candidate only pass exams.
The Complainants expectation the Institution will conduct tuitions instead of lectures to help him only clear exams, and with no other goal in mind, is unfortunate, and not the hallmark of a quality student.
7. The complainant further alleges that the technology used in the conduct of these classes was faulty, and resulted in frequent cancellations .
The Institution has conducted over 80 lectures, of two hours each, over the period of 6 months . This amounts to almost one lecture every alternate day. The schedule for the same is attached.
The Institute also has a recording of each of these lectures available online on the LMS, which are proof that they did take place, and were successfully conducted. A certified statement to this effect from EXCEL TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD, MYSORE, the company that manages the technical infrastructure of the Institution, is attached.
8. It is to be noted that the technology used requires candidates and students to have, and use, their own Personal Computers and Broadband Internet Connections of suitable speed, to attend these classes.
The technology also requires students to have the requisite multimedia infrastructure, such as speakers etc., equipment most commonly found in computers today.
Problems is customer hardware may cause issues in accessing the lectures, and upon receiving a complaint from Candidates, the technical support team at the Institution investigates the cause, and advises the candidate on the steps to be taken to rectify the situation.
But the Institution further notes that the Complainant has not, on ANY occasion, during the 6 month period, ever raised a complaint, either in written or verbally, regarding his inability to access these lectures or of the alleged technical challenges.
This can only mean that the candidate was not attending lectures due to paucity of time on his end, and these charges have been fabricated later, only to put pressure on the Institution for his refund.
9. The complainant has alleged that the facility of viewing recorded lectures was not provided as per schedule.
The Institution has been regular in uploading its Lectures and Video’s, and the same are available in the LMS to all students.
A certificate to that effect from EXCEL TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD, MYSORE, is attached, verifying our claims.
This charge is therefore false and trumped up.
10. The Program has been attended by 186 other candidates in the Complainant’s batch, and the complainant is the only candidate to demand a refund, or allege any form of irreconcilable failure on the Institutions part.
The Lectures and all other facilities have been successfully used by many of the Complainant’s classmates, without any issues.
On the Institutions request, some of them have given emailed testimonials to the effect, and have stated their satisfaction at the entire conduct of the course. These candidates are of credibility and repute, and are employed at high position in large companies, and as such, their professional and personal opinion of the ‘Professionalism’ of the Institution can be taken in view.
The Testimonials for 3 such candidates are attached.
11. The Complainant has, in fact, as per the technical records available with Excel Technologies Pvt LTd., over the period of 6 months, logged into the system over a total of only 10 days, spending a total of few hours, which is not even a fraction of the time required to be spent in the study of a serious course such as the Masters in Business Administration.
It is but natural for the complaintant to feel inadequately prepared for the exams in this case, and instead of trying to improve himself and put more effort into the studies, the complainant has decided to withdraw from the course. It is unfortunate that he has further resorted to unfair means and wrongful allegations, only in a effort to recover his ‘investment’ .
It is apparent that the Complainant has initially enrolled in the Program after doing all due diligence of the authenticity of the Program, and has been satisfied with the progress and conduct of the program right upto the declaration for the First Semester Examinations.
At the time of declaration of Examination, the complainant has found himself ill prepared for the same, and has asked to be excused from the same.
After the successful completion of these examinations by the Institutions, the complainant has suddenly decided not to pursue the course further, and requested a refund on prorate basis.
When the same has been denied to him, and the rules he had agreed to pointed out, the complainant has decided to make a Legal allegation, and not finding any point in his favor, has decided to fabricate allegations of deficiency in the service, which, till this point he had no issues about.
If a request such as made by the candidate is granted, no educational institutions would be able to work as students who complete the course and do not appear, or fare badly in the examinations will claim exemption from and refunds of the tuition fees, which is beyond reasoning and fair play.
Such flimsy and obviously trumped up charges, cannot be a ground to invoke the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Hence, the complainant is not entitled for any compensation much less Rs.50, 000/-.
Hence the Opposite Party prays that the present complaint may be dismissed with exemplary costs.
Mangalore.
Dated: Advocate for Opposite Party Opposite Party
VERIFICATION
I, the Director of the Opposite Party do hereby declare that all the facts stated above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Mangalore.
Dated: Opposite Party
Com.No.149/2010
BETWEEN:
Rajendra K.Halemane. ` ….Complainant
And
The Director, UBS. …..Opposite party
VERSION STATEMENT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY
The Opposite Party above named begs to submit as follows:
1. The Instituition, in collaboration with Karnataka State Open University, has launched the said Program in an effort to provide quality education at affordable prices to Indian Working Professionals.
The Institution has as such a long and solid background in Quality Education delivered using Technology and Online Education/ E Learning, and has been running, and still runs these programs with various world class Institutions such as IIM Calcutta, IIM Kozhikode, IIT Delhi and XLRI Jamshedpur, for the past 8 years.
2. The Complaint filed by the Complainant is false, frivolous and vexatious and not maintainable in law and facts. The Complainant has enrolled in a Professional Education Course run by UBS, after completing all due diligence on his part. Six months after the commencement of the Course, I, e, after having completed and having availed of half the course, the complainant, by his own admittance, has found himself inadequately prepared to face the examinations, due to lack of time and effort.
He has subsequently sought a refund of fee on a prorate basis, wrongly believing, that he is entitled to a part refund for the remaining portion of the academic year. When denied the same, he has created a false and frivolous case of ‘deficiency of service’ to put legal pressure on the Institution to refund his money.
Both the emails sent by the Complainant to the Institution, the first regarding his inability to attend exams, stating simply
“I am not in a position to appear for the exam to be conducted in this month due to my inability to go through the subjects. Please do the needful.”
And the second, requesting a refund of the fees for the remaining portion of the year, stating
“
As I am not in a position to continue the MBA-Professional - 2009, I am requesting you to refund the 2nd semester fee which has been credited to UBS a/c during Dec.2009 in advance.
“
Emails indicate that the complainant has no issues with any of the services provided, but simply is unable to cope with the requirements of the course. The institution sympathizes with him, but will not accept the complainant maligning the institution just in a ploy to extract an undue and unjust refund.
The two emails are attached
3. The Institution, like most Degree Granting Academic Institutions, work on an Annual Academic Fee basis. Students who drop out in the middle of the year for whatsoever reasons are not entitled to a prorate refund. They ARE allowed to withdraw from such courses, and are then held not liable to pay for SUCCESSIVE YEARS of the course. Similarly, if the candidate does not appear for and fails in a mid-year examination, he IS entitled to continue for the year, and not held back, in line with the ‘Academic Term Year’ concept.
As clearly stated in the Information Prospectus available with the Complainant, and in fact as admitted by the complainant, the complainant is liable to pay the full fee for the Academic Year. Only to facilitate the payments, the students are provided with an installment scheme for payment of their fees. The first installment is paid on joining, and the second installment 3 months after.
Non appearance / Opting out of the second semester would not be a entitlement for the Opposite Party to claim refund of the balance fee, as the commitment made by the complainant is for the whole course and not for the split semesters.
Also clearly stated in the rules section of the Prospectus fees paid are non refundable, and the same has been understood and agreed upon by the Complainant before enrolling for the Program.
4. The candidate has paid his due fee, including the second installment, which was paid on 20th of December 2009.
The second installment was paid by him willingly, and without protest. This can only indicate that he was satisfied with the facilities provided by the Institution, and the progress of the course.
There could have been no undue pressure on the Complainant to pay this second fee, nor threat of legal action from the Institution.
This clearly indicates his allegations berating the ‘deficiency of service’ ranging right from the start of the course to uptil the examinations, as having been fabricated and trumped up as an afterthought.
5. The Complainant hints at or alleges an irregularity in the Institutions (UBS’s) claims of the Program and Course to be recognized by Karnataka State Open University.
Whereas, the Complainant, has in his own submission to the FORUM, enclosed a copy of an email conversation between himself and the Registrar of KSOU, wherein he has, before enrollment, sought to verify the Institutions claims. And the same has been confirmed as to be an authorized institution by the Registrar.
A copy of the said email, as received from the Forum, as a part of the complainant’s submission, is included.
The Institution stands by its claims regarding the Program’s authenticity, and recognition by the Karnataka State Open University.
6. The Complainant alleges an inordinate delay, amounting to more than three (3) months, in the dispatch of courseware and conduct of classes.
The complainant, by his own admittance, has paid the fee amount (directly into the bank account of the Institution) of Rs.15, 200 on the 29th of August, 2009.
The Institution has received his application form after the receipt of the fee, by the first week of September 2009. Thereafter, the Institution has acted swiftly, in verifying and approving the Complainant’s enrollment, and has provided the student access to the Online Class facility in September itself (Schedule Attached), and Access to LMS facility on the 13th of October.
The candidates courseware and Admission letter has been dispatched to him on the 16 of October, 2009, via Blue Dart Couriers, Package AWB No. [protected], and the same has been received by the Complainant on the 19th of October, 2009.
A copy of the Courier Invoice is attached, as well as certificate of delivery from Blue Dart Express Limited is attached
The Forum would agree that an Admission and enrollment to a Masters Degree Program from a Government University is not like purchasing a TV or fridge, and a time of 5-6 weeks to process such an application can be considered fair.
Hence the contentions of the complainant that the Opposite Party had failed to keep up their promises regarding the delivery of Courseware, or a delay of more than three months, is false.
6. The Complaintant also challenges the manner in which the Institution has conducted its online classes, stating ‘The ways the classes done were irrelevant on the examination point of view’.
The Institution has conducted regular classes from very senior faculty, hailing from Institutions such as IIM Calcutta and IISC Bangalore, in an attempt to impart knowledge and skills to Students, not just degrees. Hence, the teaching by the professors are Skill, Academics & Knowledge Oriented, not tuitions to help candidate only pass exams.
The Complainants expectation the Institution will conduct tuitions instead of lectures to help him only clear exams, and with no other goal in mind, is unfortunate, and not the hallmark of a quality student.
7. The complainant further alleges that the technology used in the conduct of these classes was faulty, and resulted in frequent cancellations .
The Institution has conducted over 80 lectures, of two hours each, over the period of 6 months . This amounts to almost one lecture every alternate day. The schedule for the same is attached.
The Institute also has a recording of each of these lectures available online on the LMS, which are proof that they did take place, and were successfully conducted. A certified statement to this effect from EXCEL TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD, MYSORE, the company that manages the technical infrastructure of the Institution, is attached.
8. It is to be noted that the technology used requires candidates and students to have, and use, their own Personal Computers and Broadband Internet Connections of suitable speed, to attend these classes.
The technology also requires students to have the requisite multimedia infrastructure, such as speakers etc., equipment most commonly found in computers today.
Problems is customer hardware may cause issues in accessing the lectures, and upon receiving a complaint from Candidates, the technical support team at the Institution investigates the cause, and advises the candidate on the steps to be taken to rectify the situation.
But the Institution further notes that the Complainant has not, on ANY occasion, during the 6 month period, ever raised a complaint, either in written or verbally, regarding his inability to access these lectures or of the alleged technical challenges.
This can only mean that the candidate was not attending lectures due to paucity of time on his end, and these charges have been fabricated later, only to put pressure on the Institution for his refund.
9. The complainant has alleged that the facility of viewing recorded lectures was not provided as per schedule.
The Institution has been regular in uploading its Lectures and Video’s, and the same are available in the LMS to all students.
A certificate to that effect from EXCEL TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD, MYSORE, is attached, verifying our claims.
This charge is therefore false and trumped up.
10. The Program has been attended by 186 other candidates in the Complainant’s batch, and the complainant is the only candidate to demand a refund, or allege any form of irreconcilable failure on the Institutions part.
The Lectures and all other facilities have been successfully used by many of the Complainant’s classmates, without any issues.
On the Institutions request, some of them have given emailed testimonials to the effect, and have stated their satisfaction at the entire conduct of the course. These candidates are of credibility and repute, and are employed at high position in large companies, and as such, their professional and personal opinion of the ‘Professionalism’ of the Institution can be taken in view.
The Testimonials for 3 such candidates are attached.
11. The Complainant has, in fact, as per the technical records available with Excel Technologies Pvt LTd., over the period of 6 months, logged into the system over a total of only 10 days, spending a total of few hours, which is not even a fraction of the time required to be spent in the study of a serious course such as the Masters in Business Administration.
It is but natural for the complaintant to feel inadequately prepared for the exams in this case, and instead of trying to improve himself and put more effort into the studies, the complainant has decided to withdraw from the course. It is unfortunate that he has further resorted to unfair means and wrongful allegations, only in a effort to recover his ‘investment’ .
It is apparent that the Complainant has initially enrolled in the Program after doing all due diligence of the authenticity of the Program, and has been satisfied with the progress and conduct of the program right upto the declaration for the First Semester Examinations.
At the time of declaration of Examination, the complainant has found himself ill prepared for the same, and has asked to be excused from the same.
After the successful completion of these examinations by the Institutions, the complainant has suddenly decided not to pursue the course further, and requested a refund on prorate basis.
When the same has been denied to him, and the rules he had agreed to pointed out, the complainant has decided to make a Legal allegation, and not finding any point in his favor, has decided to fabricate allegations of deficiency in the service, which, till this point he had no issues about.
If a request such as made by the candidate is granted, no educational institutions would be able to work as students who complete the course and do not appear, or fare badly in the examinations will claim exemption from and refunds of the tuition fees, which is beyond reasoning and fair play.
Such flimsy and obviously trumped up charges, cannot be a ground to invoke the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Hence, the complainant is not entitled for any compensation much less Rs.50, 000/-.
Hence the Opposite Party prays that the present complaint may be dismissed with exemplary costs.
Mangalore.
Dated: Advocate for Opposite Party Opposite Party
VERIFICATION
I, the Director of the Opposite Party do hereby declare that all the facts stated above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Mangalore.
Dated: Opposite Party
True... MSL Learning Systems Pvt is a totally fraud company running their so called University 18. I had also enrolled for one of their course but their people are pathetic when it comes to customer support, Also their sales people are very mean and selfish, specially the ladies, I remember someone by the name 'Kandra'. She was the one who counselled me and assured me that I would be getting this and that but all off the promises were just fake and totally bu*ls#!t. Hence I request all the people not to join any of the courses offered by this university 18 or MSL Learning systems Pvt Ltd as you would only end up with more problems and your hard earned money being wasted.
A very frustrated customer o[censored]niversity 18 or MSL Learning Pvt Ltd.
A very frustrated customer o[censored]niversity 18 or MSL Learning Pvt Ltd.
True... MSL Learning Systems Pvt is a totally fraud company running their so called University 18. I had also enrolled for one of their course but their people are pathetic when it comes to customer support, Also their sales people are very mean and selfish, specially the ladies, I remember someone by the name 'Kandra'. She was the one who counselled me and assured me that I would be getting this and that but all off the promises were just fake and totally bu*ls#!t. Hence I request all the people not to join any of the courses offered by this university 18 or MSL Learning systems Pvt Ltd as you would only end up with more problems and your hard earned money being wasted.
A very frustrated customer o[censored]niversity 18 or MSL Learning Pvt Ltd.
A very frustrated customer o[censored]niversity 18 or MSL Learning Pvt Ltd.
The Company is being run by inexperienced staff who are actually not interested in finding a solution for your problems.
This UNIVERSITY18 people prepared some bogus certificates as proof of online classes with the help of EXCEL TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD, MYSORE & won the case. I did not pursue the matter due to further time & money involved in it!
You can see their first comment here in this thread :- "you are a fraud"
You can see their first comment here in this thread :- "you are a fraud"
Customer satisfaction rating Customer satisfaction rating is a complex algorithm that helps our users determine how good
a company is at responding and resolving complaints by granting from 1 to 5 stars for each
complaint and then ultimately combining them all for an overall score.
Read more
Read more
100%
Complaints
2
Pending
0
Resolved
2
View all 2 University 18 reviews & complaints
+91 12 4476 7000
U18, ASquare, 278, Udyog Vihar Phase II, Gurgaon, Haryana, India - 122016
View all University 18 contact information
MY case is being prepared by the lawer and i will ensure I win
Kumar