UPDATE 02/01/26On 01/28/26, the company falsely accused this review of defamation and reported it to Trustpilot in an effort to have the negative review removed. The review was temporarily taken down during Trustpilot’s review process. After Trustpilot’s independent assessment and review of supporting documentation, the review was reinstated in full, confirming it complied with Trustpilot’s guidelines and that the defamation allegation was unfounded.DO NOT RELY ON THE ADVERTISED “refund if not court accepted” guarantee. My experience is documented below.Factual record 1. I was a paying customer who completed the course in full.I enrolled, paid, completed the course, and was issued a completion certificate. Proof of purchase and certification exists and has been provided to Trustpilot. Any suggestion that I was “never a customer” is false. 2. The course was not accepted by the court. At the time of purchase, the course was represented as meeting court requirements. The alleged jurisdictional limitation was raised only after course completion and submission of the certificate. 3. The advertised refund guarantee was not honored.After the course was not accepted, I requested a refund. The company refused to issue a refund even after I obtained and provided a court order confirming non-acceptance. 4. No refund was issued by the company.Any reference to “assistance” or “transfer of payment” did not resolve the issue. Resolution occurred only after my credit card issuer reviewed the documentation and processed a chargeback. 5. Claims that written confirmation was required are contradicted by the record.Written proof of non-acceptance was provided, including a court order. The refund was still denied. 6. Disputing my status as a customer is demonstrably false. Payment records, course completion, and issuance of a certificate — all submitted — directly contradict the company’s claim that I was not a customer. 7. Public explanations have shifted over time.Earlier responses disputed my status as a customer; later responses reframed the issue as jurisdictional. None addressed the refusal to honor the advertised refund after formal proof of non-acceptance was provided. (The company has edited responses overtime on Trustpilot) 8. Irrelevant matters were referenced.Any reference to a DCFS matter is factually inaccurate. That matter was dismissed and was not pending at the relevant time. It has no bearing on the non-acceptance of the course or the refusal to issue a refund.ConclusionThe course was not accepted. A refund was requested and denied. The company did not issue a refund. The refund was issued by my credit card provider through a chargeback. That outcome directly contradicts the advertised “money-back guarantee.” The factual record stands. In addition, the company had falsely accused of defamation. When considering working with this company I strongly recommend reading this review with consideration.
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
North American Learning Institute provides affordable, self-paced online education designed to meet court, workplace, and compliance requirements. Our programs are used by individuals, employers, courts, agencies, and organizations across many jurisdictions for training such as anger management, parenting education, domestic violence awareness, HIPAA, and workplace compliance.
Our courses are designed to be accessible, easy to use, and available online at any time, allowing students to complete required education on their own schedule. Thousands of students enroll in our programs each year for a wide range of legal, professional, and personal development needs.
Acceptance requirements are determined by the specific court, agency, employer, or organization requesting the course and may vary by state, county, jurisdiction, case type, or agency-specific approval lists. For this reason, students with court-ordered or agency-mandated requirements are encouraged to verify eligibility with the requesting authority prior to enrollment.
Our refund policy applies when a specific course is formally rejected in writing by the requiring authority and explicitly names North American Learning Institute or the course. Situations where a court or agency requires enrollment in a particular provider list or program type are considered jurisdiction-specific requirements rather than a rejection of the course itself.
We are committed to transparency, consistency, and supporting students throughout the enrollment process. Our team works to clearly explain requirements, assist with course selection, and provide documentation when requested by courts, agencies, or employers.See more
