$30K total aid to UC Irvine... would you do it?? Forum

[gitguy]

Inevitable TLS thread drama aside, thanks to everyone for their input. I know how to read the writing on the wall, I just wanted to solicit feedback and I appreciate everyone's candor.

[timbs4339]

Nerve struck: http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3#p6644113.

Lol.

A-B-S. A-Always, B-Be, S-Shilling. Always be shilling. ALWAYS BE SHILLING. A-I-D-A. Attention, Interest, Decision, Action. Attention - Do I have your attention? Interest - Are you interested? I know you are, because it's fuck or walk. You close or you hit the bricks. Decision - Have you made your decision, for Christ? And Action. A-I-D-A. Get out there - you got the admitted students coming in. You think they came in to get out of the rain? A guy don't walk on campus lest he wants to buy. They're sitting out there waiting to give you their money. Are you gonna take it? Are you man enough to take it? What's the problem, pal?

[071816]

FUCK CHEMERINSKY

[gitguy]

Just wanted to update everyone on my decision. I swung a deferral with admissions. As a result, I got them to bump my scholly to $45K over three years (essentially one year tuition off).

In the meantime, I have given in to the TLS mantra, and I am going to re-take in October and hopefully swing a higher score. Dean Austin confirmed to me that a lower score could not hurt my app.

It appears I have nothing to lose (aside from another year of my life). But I have already gotten a lot more money then I ever would have if I just shut my mouth and enrolled. Now it's time to go for gold.

I wouldn't mind a few tips on LG preparation, that was always my weak spot. As it stands, I can typically get through 3 games with 90 - 100% accuracy, but that fourth game would make all the difference. Thanks!

[mephistopheles]

still no.

[DoveBodyWash]

Just wanted to update everyone on my decision. I swung a deferral with admissions. As a result, I got them to bump my scholly to $45K over three years (essentially one year tuition off).

Is this with your deferral? Or incentive not to defer?

In the meantime, I have given in to the TLS mantra, and I am going to re-take in October and hopefully swing a higher score. Dean Austin confirmed to me that a lower score could not hurt my app.

Wait so are you re-taking the October test as a deferred UCI candidate? Or are you re-taking on a clean slate? If you're re-taking in October anyway then why not just withdraw from UCI completely and re-apply to a fresh set of schools including UCI?

[gitguy]

Just wanted to update everyone on my decision. I swung a deferral with admissions. As a result, I got them to bump my scholly to $45K over three years (essentially one year tuition off).

Is this with your deferral? Or incentive not to defer?

In the meantime, I have given in to the TLS mantra, and I am going to re-take in October and hopefully swing a higher score. Dean Austin confirmed to me that a lower score could not hurt my app.

Wait so are you re-taking the October test as a deferred UCI candidate? Or are you re-taking on a clean slate? If you're re-taking in October anyway then why not just withdraw from UCI completely and re-apply to a fresh set of schools including UCI?

It is with my deferral. Essentially because I'm locked in for next year, they can carve that money out ahead of time. To the second point, I'm re-taking as a deferred UCI candidate. I'm set on UCI, though I may throw an app toward UCLA/USC if my LSAT warrants.

[Rahviveh]

Just wanted to update everyone on my decision. I swung a deferral with admissions. As a result, I got them to bump my scholly to $45K over three years (essentially one year tuition off).

Is this with your deferral? Or incentive not to defer?

In the meantime, I have given in to the TLS mantra, and I am going to re-take in October and hopefully swing a higher score. Dean Austin confirmed to me that a lower score could not hurt my app.

Wait so are you re-taking the October test as a deferred UCI candidate? Or are you re-taking on a clean slate? If you're re-taking in October anyway then why not just withdraw from UCI completely and re-apply to a fresh set of schools including UCI?

It is with my deferral. Essentially because I'm locked in for next year, they can carve that money out ahead of time. To the second point, I'm re-taking as a deferred UCI candidate. I'm set on UCI, though I may throw an app toward UCLA/USC if my LSAT warrants.

From my understanding, you can't reapply if you commit to a deferral.

[gitguy]

I should add that I lost the $5K first year grant, though I will likely get it again next year. This means that my total guaranteed aid is $45K right now, but could be $50K.

[IAFG]

I just want to say that I don't think this is a terrible plan. Particularly not if you use your time well to try to make solid professional connections with orgs that could employ you.

[DoveBodyWash]

Just wanted to update everyone on my decision. I swung a deferral with admissions. As a result, I got them to bump my scholly to $45K over three years (essentially one year tuition off).

Is this with your deferral? Or incentive not to defer?

In the meantime, I have given in to the TLS mantra, and I am going to re-take in October and hopefully swing a higher score. Dean Austin confirmed to me that a lower score could not hurt my app.

Wait so are you re-taking the October test as a deferred UCI candidate? Or are you re-taking on a clean slate? If you're re-taking in October anyway then why not just withdraw from UCI completely and re-apply to a fresh set of schools including UCI?

It is with my deferral. Essentially because I'm locked in for next year, they can carve that money out ahead of time. To the second point, I'm re-taking as a deferred UCI candidate. I'm set on UCI, though I may throw an app toward UCLA/USC if my LSAT warrants.

From my understanding, you can't reapply if you commit to a deferral.

+1

OP you will be effectively be locking yourself in to UCI, and if you're set on UCI that's fine. Trust me you'll be admitted again if you re-apply. The problem with being deferred is that the scholarship amount is usually locked as well. So there would be no point in re-taking the LSAT since you'd get the same scholarship from them anyway.

Next cycle is the most important cycle for UCI since it will determine their inaugural rank. So they're likely going to be very generous with scholly next cycle. You should withdraw, and re-take, and re-apply. You will be admitted to UCI again, likely with more scholarship if you get a higher LSAT. And you would have other options to consider or use to negotiate with UCI. It is to your every advantage to withdraw.

[gitguy]

My understanding with Dean Austin is that a higher LSAT would get me more money, so the $45K is locked, but there could be more given a higher score. Taking the deferral was a sign of good faith on my part, but if I get a T-14 score, you can bet I might change course.

Edit: quote

[BigZuck]

From what I understand if you defer, you're locked into UCI for next cycle. Even if you Noodley that B you won't be able to apply to any other school next year. You will have to wait for the NEXT cycle.

Withdraw, retake, and reapply so that you have options for next cycle.

[prāna]

.

[gitguy]

From what I understand if you defer, you're locked into UCI for next cycle. Even if you Noodley that B you won't be able to apply to any other school next year. You will have to wait for the NEXT cycle.

Withdraw, retake, and reapply so that you have options for next cycle.

this is true. OP, if you are retaking, might as well withdraw. i think people with your #s got more aid at UCI than you did this year. did you apply late or smth?

I applied the day the application became available, I was perturbed about the offer as well which is why I fought with them so hard on it.

I'm going to stick to my guns on the deferral for now. I feel everyone's assessment here is right on, but I have had extensive in-person and e-mail correspondence to get to this point with Dean Austin. The deferral grabbed me an extra $30K outright, and I don't feel Dean Austin is planning to low-ball me simply because I'm "locked in", because we all know that in reality I am not locked in.

[BigZuck]

From what I understand if you defer, you're locked into UCI for next cycle. Even if you Noodley that B you won't be able to apply to any other school next year. You will have to wait for the NEXT cycle.

Withdraw, retake, and reapply so that you have options for next cycle.

this is true. OP, if you are retaking, might as well withdraw. i think people with your #s got more aid at UCI than you did this year. did you apply late or smth?

I applied the day the application became available, I was perturbed about the offer as well which is why I fought with them so hard on it.

I'm going to stick to my guns on the deferral for now. I feel everyone's assessment here is right on, but I have had extensive in-person and e-mail correspondence to get to this point with Dean Austin. The deferral grabbed me an extra $30K outright, and I don't feel Dean Austin is planning to low-ball me simply because I'm "locked in", because we all know that in reality I am not locked in.

The problem with your reality is that it does not jive with actual reality.

Because you have deferred, you are locked in. If you want to attend law school in the fall of 2014, it will have to be at UCI. Even if you Noodley the LSAT and Harvard wants to give you a full ride, you cannot take it. You cannot apply to other schools next cycle. If you go to law school, it has to be UCI.

By deferring you are saying you will attend UCI in the fall of 2014. If you want to apply to other schools you have to wait two cycles from now and then attend in the fall of 2015.

Withdraw, retake, and reapply so that you have options next cycle.

[gitguy]

From what I understand if you defer, you're locked into UCI for next cycle. Even if you Noodley that B you won't be able to apply to any other school next year. You will have to wait for the NEXT cycle.

Withdraw, retake, and reapply so that you have options for next cycle.

this is true. OP, if you are retaking, might as well withdraw. i think people with your #s got more aid at UCI than you did this year. did you apply late or smth?

I applied the day the application became available, I was perturbed about the offer as well which is why I fought with them so hard on it.

I'm going to stick to my guns on the deferral for now. I feel everyone's assessment here is right on, but I have had extensive in-person and e-mail correspondence to get to this point with Dean Austin. The deferral grabbed me an extra $30K outright, and I don't feel Dean Austin is planning to low-ball me simply because I'm "locked in", because we all know that in reality I am not locked in.

The problem with your reality is that it does not jive with actual reality.

Because you have deferred, you are locked in. If you want to attend law school in the fall of 2014, it will have to be at UCI. Even if you Noodley the LSAT and Harvard wants to give you a full ride, you cannot take it. You cannot apply to other schools next cycle. If you go to law school, it has to be UCI.

By deferring you are saying you will attend UCI in the fall of 2014. If you want to apply to other schools you have to wait two cycles from now and then attend in the fall of 2015.

Withdraw, retake, and reapply so that you have options next cycle.

I hear ya, and I totally understand the implications of the deferral. I have made a very personal appeal to Dean Austin, and the understanding is I am going for more money. She knows I am retaking to to go for more money, it is not a secret on my part.

She did not dissuade me from re-taking, and she did indicate a better score would have a positive impact on my scholarship. Come November, I will get my score. If I knock it out of the park, I get some serious additional cash. If not, I just swung $45K that would never have otherwise materialized by negotiating this. The deferral was her idea, and I really think that it was the only latitude she had to give me anything more than my initial offer of $0.

Would that change your analysis here?

[bananasplit19]

I hear ya, and I totally understand the implications of the deferral. I have made a very personal appeal to Dean Austin, and the understanding is I am going for more money. She knows I am retaking to to go for more money, it is not a secret on my part.

She did not dissuade me from re-taking, and she did indicate a better score would have a positive impact on my scholarship. Come November, I will get my score. If I knock it out of the park, I get some serious additional cash. If not, I just swung $45K that would never have otherwise materialized by negotiating this. The deferral was her idea, and I really think that it was the only latitude she had to give me anything more than my initial offer of $0.

Would that change your analysis here?

I think what people are trying to say is that you're leaving yourself exposed next year if you get the rug pulled out from under you. Sure, Dean Austin may give you her assurances now, but a lot can change in a year. In the deferral scenario, what's to stop them from just offering you the same scholly next year without the extra amount, or even worse, reducing/eliminating your scholly altogether (as a worst case scenario), even if you get a 180 on your LSAT? Since you deferred, you aren't able to say, for example, "screw you for screwing me, I'm taking my talents to UCLA/USC." As BigZuck notes, your only recourse then is to withdraw and then apply for the year following next cycle. Seems like a huge risk to take solely on good faith and the hope of an extra $10K/year.

If you're dead set on Irvine and nowhere else, then I suppose there's a certain logic there, but is that the case? I really do think the smart move here is to withdraw, not defer. If you nail your LSAT, then Irvine will still be begging you to come, but you'll be able to leverage other acceptances as scholly negotiation, or possibly even sneak your way into a T14. In other words, even if your goal is solely to squeeze more money out of UCI, it would still behoove you to withdraw, right?

[gitguy]

I hear ya, and I totally understand the implications of the deferral. I have made a very personal appeal to Dean Austin, and the understanding is I am going for more money. She knows I am retaking to to go for more money, it is not a secret on my part.

She did not dissuade me from re-taking, and she did indicate a better score would have a positive impact on my scholarship. Come November, I will get my score. If I knock it out of the park, I get some serious additional cash. If not, I just swung $45K that would never have otherwise materialized by negotiating this. The deferral was her idea, and I really think that it was the only latitude she had to give me anything more than my initial offer of $0.

Would that change your analysis here?

I think what people are trying to say is that you're leaving yourself exposed next year if you get the rug pulled out from under you. Sure, Dean Austin may give you her assurances now, but a lot can change in a year. In the deferral scenario, what's to stop them from just offering you the same scholly next year without the extra amount, or even worse, reducing/eliminating your scholly altogether (as a worst case scenario), even if you get a 180 on your LSAT? Since you deferred, you aren't able to say, for example, "screw you for screwing me, I'm taking my talents to UCLA/USC." As BigZuck notes, your only recourse then is to withdraw and then apply for the year following next cycle. Seems like a huge risk to take solely on good faith and the hope of an extra $10K/year.

If you're dead set on Irvine and nowhere else, then I suppose there's a certain logic there, but is that the case? I really do think the smart move here is to withdraw, not defer. If you nail your LSAT, then Irvine will still be begging you to come, but you'll be able to leverage other acceptances as scholly negotiation, or possibly even sneak your way into a T14. In other words, even if your goal is solely to squeeze more money out of UCI, it would still behoove you to withdraw, right?

What is to stop me from withdrawing once I get my score and applying in November? Most people don't even get around to applying until late November or December. I don't understand all of this 2015 business. And that's not a rhetorical question.

[BigZuck]

I hear ya, and I totally understand the implications of the deferral. I have made a very personal appeal to Dean Austin, and the understanding is I am going for more money. She knows I am retaking to to go for more money, it is not a secret on my part.

She did not dissuade me from re-taking, and she did indicate a better score would have a positive impact on my scholarship. Come November, I will get my score. If I knock it out of the park, I get some serious additional cash. If not, I just swung $45K that would never have otherwise materialized by negotiating this. The deferral was her idea, and I really think that it was the only latitude she had to give me anything more than my initial offer of $0.

Would that change your analysis here?

I think what people are trying to say is that you're leaving yourself exposed next year if you get the rug pulled out from under you. Sure, Dean Austin may give you her assurances now, but a lot can change in a year. In the deferral scenario, what's to stop them from just offering you the same scholly next year without the extra amount, or even worse, reducing/eliminating your scholly altogether (as a worst case scenario), even if you get a 180 on your LSAT? Since you deferred, you aren't able to say, for example, "screw you for screwing me, I'm taking my talents to UCLA/USC." As BigZuck notes, your only recourse then is to withdraw and then apply for the year following next cycle. Seems like a huge risk to take solely on good faith and the hope of an extra $10K/year.

If you're dead set on Irvine and nowhere else, then I suppose there's a certain logic there, but is that the case? I really do think the smart move here is to withdraw, not defer. If you nail your LSAT, then Irvine will still be begging you to come, but you'll be able to leverage other acceptances as scholly negotiation, or possibly even sneak your way into a T14. In other words, even if your goal is solely to squeeze more money out of UCI, it would still behoove you to withdraw, right?

What is to stop me from withdrawing once I get my score and applying in November? Most people don't even get around to applying until late November or December. I don't understand all of this 2015 business. And that's not a rhetorical question.

When you defer, you have to go to that school the next cycle. If you want to go to another school, you have to wait for another cycle after that. By deferring you have committed to attending UCI next year.

[gitguy]

I hear ya, and I totally understand the implications of the deferral. I have made a very personal appeal to Dean Austin, and the understanding is I am going for more money. She knows I am retaking to to go for more money, it is not a secret on my part.

She did not dissuade me from re-taking, and she did indicate a better score would have a positive impact on my scholarship. Come November, I will get my score. If I knock it out of the park, I get some serious additional cash. If not, I just swung $45K that would never have otherwise materialized by negotiating this. The deferral was her idea, and I really think that it was the only latitude she had to give me anything more than my initial offer of $0.

Would that change your analysis here?

I think what people are trying to say is that you're leaving yourself exposed next year if you get the rug pulled out from under you. Sure, Dean Austin may give you her assurances now, but a lot can change in a year. In the deferral scenario, what's to stop them from just offering you the same scholly next year without the extra amount, or even worse, reducing/eliminating your scholly altogether (as a worst case scenario), even if you get a 180 on your LSAT? Since you deferred, you aren't able to say, for example, "screw you for screwing me, I'm taking my talents to UCLA/USC." As BigZuck notes, your only recourse then is to withdraw and then apply for the year following next cycle. Seems like a huge risk to take solely on good faith and the hope of an extra $10K/year.

If you're dead set on Irvine and nowhere else, then I suppose there's a certain logic there, but is that the case? I really do think the smart move here is to withdraw, not defer. If you nail your LSAT, then Irvine will still be begging you to come, but you'll be able to leverage other acceptances as scholly negotiation, or possibly even sneak your way into a T14. In other words, even if your goal is solely to squeeze more money out of UCI, it would still behoove you to withdraw, right?

What is to stop me from withdrawing once I get my score and applying in November? Most people don't even get around to applying until late November or December. I don't understand all of this 2015 business. And that's not a rhetorical question.

When you defer, you have to go to that school the next cycle. If you want to go to another school, you have to wait for another cycle after that. By deferring you have committed to attending UCI next year.

How is that the least bit binding? Many people put down deposits and then go somewhere else. How is this any different? Not being sarcastic.

[gitguy]

I should clarify that I didn't sign anything. It's a verbal agreement (but let's not get into contract theory too much). In any case, withdrawing now vs. withdrawing in November, is there a real difference there. I should clarify that I am very much set on Irvine.

[DoveBodyWash]

It's not the same as withdrawing a deposit. It's a mutual agreement. And it's pretty binding. not only does it reflect terribly on you as an aspiring lawyer if you broke it but UCI could theoretically inform schools of your agreement. Then you'd be fucked. I'm pretty sure the LSAC has a way to keep applicants from violating their agreements. And when you apply is irrelevant. Once the cycle starts in September if starts.

It won't be a verbal agreement for long. Trust me you will have to sign something

[bananasplit19]

How is that the least bit binding? Many people put down deposits and then go somewhere else. How is this any different? Not being sarcastic.

Alright, I think your plan is clearer to me, at least. In effect, you want to keep UCI on the hook for next year, and if you nail the LSAT, then you withdraw your deferred acceptance, then you apply elsewhere, and re-apply at UCI. Clever.

A couple problems, though. You should make absolutely sure that the UCI deferral is not contractually binding. You say you have a specific understanding with Dean Austin. I would make 100% sure, because if it's even in a grey area, it could come to bite you in the ass ethically come bar interview time. Additionally, and more importantly, a lot of law school apps (if not all of them) have a section along the lines of whether you've attended/committed to attend other law schools in previous cycles. If you withdraw from UCI before submitting these apps to other schools in Nov/Dec, you may or may not be in the clear in regards to answering truthfully. But even if you are, then you potentially lose your UCI scholly/acceptance (because you'll have to reapply and they'll know you were just using them as backup...seems like a one-way ticket to a waitlist to me).

I dunno, guy, it just seems like a lot of inside baseball. Make sure you've evaluated all the risks and variables before jumping.

[BigZuck]

I should clarify that I didn't sign anything. It's a verbal agreement (but let's not get into contract theory too much). In any case, withdrawing now vs. withdrawing in November, is there a real difference there. I should clarify that I am very much set on Irvine.

http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/bid/153 ... law-school

This basically is what I always understood the process looks like.