Date Received: 2020-09-05
Issue: Getting a loan
Subissue: Fraudulent loan
Consumer Complaint: In XXXX of 2018 a loan from DEPTEDNELNET was opened in my name. This loan was opened without my authorization. I have disputed this issue and I am still waiting for this to be resolved. This is now on all three of my bureaus and has greatly lowered my score.
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: 11784
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-05
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-09-05
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Subissue: Information belongs to someone else
Consumer Complaint: Recently, I received a copy of my credit report and found several inquiries and accounts on my credit report that were not opened by me ( See attached Police Report ). I don't have any knowledge of these accounts being open. They were opened fraudulently. I understand that under federal law, ( Sec.602 ( a ) ( b ) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. ) unauthorized inquiries, and fraudulent accounts shall not be allowed to be placed on my file unless I have approved it.The presence of these fraudulent accounts and inquiries on my credit report constitutes inaccurate information, which must be removed under the ( Sec.602 ( a ) ( b ) ) Fair Credit Reporting Act. Respondent, please have the following accounts removed from my credit file immediately because I did not authorize them, these creditors do not possess my signature, on any documentation, conveying my authorization to inquiry for a loan, or a line of credit.
Company Response:
State: FL
Zip: 33157
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-05
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-09-03
Issue: False statements or representation
Subissue: Attempted to collect wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: Please be advised that this is my SECOND WRITTEN REQUEST asking USDOE/XXXX to remove the unverified accounts listed below that remain on my credit .report in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681. You are required under the FCRA to have properly verified the accuracy of an account listed on my credit report. USDOE/XXXX # XXXX opened XX/XX/2010 balance {$0.00} PREVIOUSLY DISPUTED DUE TO TRANSFER. PLEASE REMOVE AS IT IS NEGATIVELY IMPACTING MY REPORT. THERE ARE TWO USDOE/XXXX ACCOUNTS WHEN THERE SHOULD ONLY BE THE CURRENT ACCOUNT. PLEASE REMOVE ACCOUNT
Company Response:
State: TX
Zip: 751XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-09-03
Issue: Problem with a lender or other company charging your account
Subissue: Money was taken from your account on the wrong day or for the wrong amount
Consumer Complaint: I have been paying for services from XXXX XXXX since Friday, XX/XX/XXXX of XXXX. I called today at XXXX as there was an overcharge on my account. Nobody answered so I left a voice message. Later at XXXX XXXX, I received a call back and was told that they " had to do a lot of digging '' to find out why. I pay {$10.00} a month for services and I was made aware through a phone call today that I have been getting charged an additional {$30.00} every month beginning on XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX with a total amount of {$800.00}, for not completing their PCI Questionnaire. My complaint is due to not properly being notified of the fee nor how to fix it. I never received this questionnaire, never got any type of phone call or even mailer regarding this. I was told that there were a few emails sent of which I assume may have gone into my spam folder if they in fact were sent, but I did not even know this questionnaire existed until today. I asked what my options were to the representative that told me of this fee over the phone and although he was very kind, he told me that I could email client services to cancel my account but that they will not be giving a refund. Took less than 5 minutes over the phone with me and didn't even try to give any kind of explanation or make things right. I sent an email to XXXX to try to get some kind of refund as I was not made aware of the extra fee or the necessary steps to cancel my account and XXXX XXXX, a client service specialist replied the following : " Hello, Thank you for the email the account has now been closed. Thank you! '' There was a complete lack of effort to give any kind of explanation or support for what happened both over the phone and through email. The total amount taken from every month for the past 25 months equals out to {$800.00}. If this questionnaire was so important as to charge triple the amount of what I pay for in monthly services, I would expect for someone to at least give me a phone call. This company showed they cared more about money than their loyal customers of years and completed avoided talking about the hidden fee. Never had anything negative to say until this point. So disappointed.
Company Response:
State: TX
Zip: 75043
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-11
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-09-03
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer
Subissue: Received bad information about your loan
Consumer Complaint: My student loan processor, Nelnet, has provided me with incomplete and confusing information, in my opinion to intentionally mislead me into consolidating my loans even though this then disqualified me from Public Service Loan Forgiveness. I have been pay my loans since XXXX and have been enrolled in plans intentional so that I would qualify for public service loan forgiveness. As recently as yesterday I was again told by, this time XXXX XXXX, that I do not have any direct loans and need to consolidate my loans again. As I started this process I was then informed by Nelnet that I do have direct loans and I would have qualified but that Nelnet consolidated my loans in XXXX and that restarted the clock on my PSLF. In XXXX I was enrolled in PSLF and also a payment plan that qualified and have always worked in public service for a qualified employer. So I asked the Nelnet worker why would anyone consolidate their loans if they are working towards PSLF. The worker reported there is no reason to have consolidated, that is does not reduce your payments and there is literally no benefit to doing this. He said many many people do consolidate and he does not know why anyone would. Why if there is no benefit to consolidating federal student loans other that setting back the clock on the PSLF, which is only a benefit to the loan processor are these companies allowed to mislead their consumers into consolidation. Again I was told I had to consolidate to qualify for PSLF, this was not true and instead it set back the clock for PSLF by 8 years. I believe these loan servicers are intentionally misleading consumers into these consolidations. The numbers of people that have consolidated even though, by their own admission there is literally no benefit to this is proof of this. Please look at the number of people that have been mislead into consolidating their student loans by predatory practices as this causes a huge amount of debt to many students, public servants and probably is responsible for great increases in the national student debt.
Company Response:
State: OR
Zip: 973XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-09-03
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Subissue: Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Consumer Complaint: I see multiple 90-120 days late marks which is a clear violation of my right under the FCRA. The company has never responded to any of my attempts to obtain any proof or documentation that will prove this account is being reported accurately.
Company Response:
State: MA
Zip: 027XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-03
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-09-02
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Subissue: Old information reappears or never goes away
Consumer Complaint: Account ending in XXXX is reporting reporting twice on my report. This old account was closed and transferred to a new and good standing account. Please delete incorrect account that shows and it is reporting only on XX/XX/XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: AZ
Zip: 85248
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-09-02
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer
Subissue: Need information about your loan balance or loan terms
Consumer Complaint: I sent a letter of Validation to Great Lakes XX/XX/2020. XXXX an agent signed for the letter XX/XX/2020. Great Lakes has not responded to my request.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: TX
Zip: 77063
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-09-02
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Subissue: Information belongs to someone else
Consumer Complaint: This is not mine - I have never done business with this company.
Company Response:
State: VA
Zip: 231XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-02
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2020-09-01
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Subissue: Investigation took more than 30 days
Consumer Complaint: I filed a dispute concerning incorrect items on my credit report. It has been over 30 days and I have not received any investigation results.
Company Response:
State: IL
Zip: 60626
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2020-09-11
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A