公考培训乱象：华图、大斌等机构教材出错，课程陈旧退费难

Group 1 - The core issue in the public examination training industry is the prevalence of misleading materials and outdated content, leading to significant dissatisfaction among students [1][3][4] - Complaints have surged against major training institutions like Huatu, Dabin, and Zhonggong, highlighting issues such as incorrect textbook answers, outdated recorded lessons, and difficulties in obtaining refunds [1][3][4][18] - The 2026 national civil service examination has seen a record number of applicants, reaching 3.718 million, with a ratio of approximately 74 applicants for each available position [1] Group 2 - Recent legal interpretations by the Supreme People's Court aim to protect consumer rights in prepaid training services, addressing common issues like refund difficulties and misleading contractual terms [2][20][21] - Consumers are advised to be cautious when selecting prepaid training services, particularly regarding promises of guaranteed results or full refunds if certain conditions are not met [2][22] - The legal framework emphasizes that consumers have the right to request refunds within seven days of payment if they have not received the service, which is crucial for addressing disputes in the education training sector [20][21][23] Group 3 - The training institutions often employ complex refund calculations that can leave students feeling they owe money despite having paid for courses, leading to further frustration [9][10][12] - Many students report that the content of the courses they enrolled in is outdated, with some lessons referencing policies and topics from several years ago, which undermines the relevance of the training [6][8][19] - The lack of transparency in refund policies and the presence of clauses that limit consumer rights have been highlighted as significant issues within the industry [13][19][24]