Hi, 

 

I have additional concerns that were not resolved because we needed to stick to the topic of resolving the issues. I am waiting for the Warning letter as promised by Mr. Kumar Pandya to finalize the resolved issue of misconduct. 

 

I repeatedly asked Mr. Kumar Pandya if I can still place my disagreements with the university and he stated that I could as long as I do it professionally and take the proper steps to do so. I think I am taking the proper steps here. I wanted to mention this, since this can be considered a complaint to the university and I sure don't want to add new items to the accusations placed on me. I also wanted to write to you to make sure that Mr. Kumar Pandya specifically states the charges on the warning letter that he promised to issue today. I did not received a clear response from him as to whether he was going to be specific as far as the charges and whether or not he will be able to specifically reference the university's voice on the issue on each of the charges. The university's voice is silent regarding the yelling by using all capital letters which is one of the issues that he brought up in the meeting between him, me and the university. Additionally the school voice is silent regarding making constant accusations on staff members. Please make sure that all charges that are mentioned are also referenced by the university's voice (the school codes of conduct). 

 

I found dealing with Mr. Kumar Pandya extremely difficult. I was trying so hard to be proper and wait my turn before I spoke. I tried hard but once in a while I would make mistakes being that I was extremely nervous about the whole situation. Mr Pandya made sure to bring it to my attention immediately when I would speak out of turn. Trying to be so careful and I kept trying. As I paid more attention and was extremely careful I noticed and actually counted how many times Mr Pandya cut into my sentences and started to speak over me. I counted at least 6 - 8 times that this happened. I brought the issue to his attention and he defended himself by saying that the meeting was about me and not him. At another time that he cut me off, he said that his are not interruptions but rather interjections. I asked Mr Pandya to please wait until I finish my entire sentence before he breaks in and that I would do the same. He refused my suggestion and kept on interrupting me at his leasure at various times. Additionally, I stated that if he is teaching me about proper business conversation, that he should do the same and not cut other people in the middle of their sentence. 

 

I also have a list of questions that Mr Pandya adamantly refused to answer. I have them listed and there are about 15 of them. On some I did get a few answers but it was like pulling teeth. When he did answer it was followed by accusations of trying to find a loophole in the system. I would like to type the questions our for you with the few answers he gave me and to please reply with the answers and/or add on to his. Is that possible?

 

When I asked him for the list of all the people that agree with him that I have violated the student code, he instantly reacted with "I don't have to do that!"  One of the questions that he either did not understand or refused to answer on numerous times is "Do we agree that the school is a legal person? ... And that as a legal person it has a voice (through the code)?" I further stated to him after being interrupted many times with comments of "..that is irrelevant", that every accusation he has on me has to be backed up by the school voice (or code). He failed to show me specifically where in the university's voice it states that 1). "difficulty communicating professionally and productively with WGU staff, and 2). "...nearly constant accusations of being disrespected by staff members who...". 

 

He further stated that all my complaints in the past are untrue and he actually used the words "...it is quite 'far fetched' because you have problems with too many people".  The definition of far fetched is to lie or to stretch the truth, isn't it?  Mr Kumar Pandya says that he is 100% sure that the items that I am claiming in the complaint emails are not so. I asked Mr. Pandya:  "Where you there?" and at the end of our conversation I asked him to retract his statement to maybe: "I am 40% sure" since he was not there, but he refused.  

 

The university is a legal person and it speaks and instructs staff members on dealing with students, teachers and courses. Everything that I have been accused of has to be specifically referenced back to the code. Mr Kumar Pandya does not understand this and totally cut me off or interrupted my sentences when I was trying to inform him. Whatever the university is silent about, is excluded; you cannot charge a student for items that are not voiced in the school codes. Your staff also cannot invent rules or make up new charges on students. An example of this is the upper letter script used in the email to emphasize the disagreement which nowhere in the school voice does it state that doing such is wrong. 

 

I keep saying university voice because your school needs to understand that our meeting took place among 3 people: 2 natural persons and a legal person. With this in mind, you must understand that every comment that was made needed to be referenced back to the school voice and in a sense ask each time: What does the university say about this?  On some of the charges, the university is completely silent. 

 

Furthermore, Mr Kumar Pandya is saying that refusing to speak to him is a violation of the code. I do find where the university voices this rule. I called Mr Pandya at least 2 times on Monday and Tuesday but there was no answer. This would have been a simple fix, since I was ignorant on that aspect of the university's voice, I feel that it would have been very simple for him to just state that the university says I was obligated to meet with him no matter what. Instead he took drastic measures and suspended me from school features such as enrolling for the new semester and holding me back from receiving my school funding as scheduled. The incident with Mike where he was using creative language to call me lazy (he said I was un-motivated), happened nearly 3 weeks ago. Mr Pandya had ample time to let me know that speaking with him was not an option but an obligation. He could have done this without taking those drastic measures that have greatly affected me with my financial situation. 

 

He states that he has an abundance of evidence against me. I want to see this evidence. Someone cannot just make statements that they have plenty of something without backing it up. 

 

As I stated earlier, dealing with Mr Pandya was extremely difficult and I almost want to state that he was extremely unprofessional, and it seems to me that he has taken my case on a personal level. Almost every question I asked him was followed by an adamant "no"; a flat "no". In my culture when someone asks for something and is to be refused, the refusing individual should take care to the feelings of the asking individual. Not to answer questions with just flat "no" but rather say "I am sorry but I am not able to accept". 

 

I am happy to comply and moving forward and to exercise proper control with my disagreements with staff members and if I am to complain, I will do so in a professional manner following the steps voiced by the university. Mr Pandya tells me that I am to be submissive to my boss and treat WGU (a legal person) as if she is my boss. The highly incorrect idea of being submissive to anyone is not going to happen. WGU is not my boss. I am her customer and if her employees disrespect me I will follow the proper steps to make sure that they don't do this again following the voice in university code. 

 

 

Please contact me if you have any more questions about my encounter with Mr Kumar Pandya and also to let me know if I can send you the questionaire that Mr Panya refused to answer. 

 

Thank you.

 

 

xxxxx Xxxxx Student