Date Received: 2016-03-24
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Trouble with how payments are handled
Consumer Complaint: NELNET - Using false dates to gain money- to say that I did n't re-apply for an income based repayment ( I have proof that I submitted 3 times all nearly a month prior ) Also using Gross Income ( not AGI ) to form their IBR repayments
Company Response:
State: OR
Zip: 97223
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-24
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-03-23
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Trouble with how payments are handled
Consumer Complaint: Auto debit on Nelnet is not doing what it advertises and taking automatic debits from my account on the due date. I 'm not behind on payments but they put me in a status that is " no pay hardship kwikpay ' and I never requested that.
Company Response:
State: LA
Zip: 70808
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-03-23
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Received bad information about my loan
Consumer Complaint: Hello, I am writing to you because I recently re-examined by eligibility for XXXX. Unfortunately, I was dismayed to learn that my federal loan servicer ( Neltnet ) failed to put me into a qualifying repayment plan, such as XXXX, and therefore prevented me from being eligible for XXXX Please allow me to explain the details of my situation and layout a clear timeline. To date, I have worked nearly 9 years full-time at XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX - present ), XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX XXXX ). Back in XXXX, when I first began working for XXXX XXXX, I spoke with my loan servicer ( Nelnet ) about my potential eligibility for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I was told then that my work did not qualify for XXXX. The man I spoke with said a XXXX repayment plan on my XXXX Consolidated loans would be the best repayment plan for me at that time. Looking back, this was a clear mistake by my loan servicer. My employment, in fact, did qualify. As a result of this error, Nelnet did not enroll me into XXXX, which would have properly allowed me to make qualified payments towards XXXX. To be clear, my repayment history began in XXXX. At that time, I put all my federal Direct student loans into a period of deferment and forbearance for a period of two years because I could not afford to make payments. I was never told then about my ability to enter into an income driven plan, which would have likely saved me money and kept me in an active repayment status for those two years. In XXXX, I also instructed my loan servicer to consolidate all my federal loans into XXXX consolidated loans - XXXX consisting of Direct subsidized loans, the other consisting of XXXX unsubsidized loans. Later, in XXXX, I asked my loan servicer to put my XXXX XXXX Consolidated loans into a standard repayment plan since I could afford to pay a bit more each month and no longer wanted the graduated repayment schedule. When I spoke with Nelnet I again asked about my eligibility for the XXXX - I was again told that I was not eligible for this plan. In short, I am requesting my loan servicer to take responsibility for this mistake and correct it by retroactively enrolling me into XXXX. I would like all my full and on-time payments since XXXX, when I originally asked about my eligibility for XXXX, to count towards forgiveness. Given the fact that I inquired about my eligibility for XXXX and was mistakenly told that my employment did not qualify, I believe it is very clear that I should not be denied the benefits I have earned for my XXXX years of public service. If this is not possible because the XXXX does not allow borrowers to be retroactively put into XXXX, then I am requesting that Nelnet provide just compensation for their mistake. Why should I pay the price for their error? Also, I would like a clear explanation from Nelnet why I was not originally put in an income driven plan back in XXXX. This would have saved me money and a tremendous amount of stress to me and my family. From a federal policy perspective, I also see my case as an indication of a much larger potential problem. As I understand, federal loan servicers are paid an amount for each borrower in " good standing ''. I believe this may inadvertently create a perverse incentive for loan servicers to act against the best interest of borrowers. In my case, Nelnet should have enrolled me into the appropriate plan given that I explicitly expressed an interest in XXXX and my employment qualified. I fear the financial incentive to keep a borrowers like myself in active repayment may cause loan servicers to forgo helping borrowers enroll in XXXX, if that means they XXXX lose the borrower sooner.
Company Response:
State: CA
Zip: 94602
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-03-22
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Need information about my balance/terms
Consumer Complaint: The XXXX form for 2015 included capital interest whereas prior year XXXX forms did not. I contacted Nelnet 's customer service several times to try to understand the change in reporting methods with no resolution. I have also requested a current amortization schedule of loan payments remaining on the loan, which has not been responded to. In general I 'd like to see how my payments have been applied to the loan, including several payments made directly to principal so that I can confirm they have actually been applied as expected.
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: 14094
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-22
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-03-23
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Trouble with how payments are handled
Consumer Complaint: My loans for grad school were transferred to NelNet in XXXX. I made payments on several occasions paying ahead, but every single time I set up the autopay so it would continue paying. I had some issues with it in XXXX but thought I finally had it working. As I was completing my taxes this year I realize the autopay was again switched off. It 's entirely possible I made an error at some point, but I ca n't tell you how many issues I had with their autopay. I received monthly bills with {$0.00} due this month. I realize now they mean I do n't have a payment due until XXXX. They 're just letting the interest accrue again since I paid ahead! It 's my fault for not catching it sooner, but I was very sure my loan was being paid on this whole time and may have confused it with NAVIENT, my other loan servicer who I 've completely paid off and also receive " {$0.00} due '' messages. So rather than paying down my loans like I thought the last two years I now owe more than I did previously. This is UDAAP at its finest. While my own ineptitude contributed to this, I think NelNet should be put on notice for terrible servicing practices.
Company Response:
State: VA
Zip: 221XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-03-23
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Trouble with how payments are handled
Consumer Complaint: I am on an IBR plan. I recently changed jobs ( I am now earning less than before ), and emailed recalculation paperwork to adjust my monthly loan payment relative to my new salary. I sent the paperwork in on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. When I did not receive an email confirmation that my paperwork was received, I sent it two more times : XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. On XXXX XXXX, I called Nelnet to confirm receipt of my paperwork. The Nelnet representative confirmed my paperwork was received on XXXX XXXX and that all information necessary to process the recalculation was in the system. When I asked for a confirmation email that the recalculation would be applied to my XXXX bill ( my payment due date is the XXXX of every month ), I was told that it " probably would be '' but he could not confirm because their paperwork processing department is so backed up and they were still processing paperwork received on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. ( Note : During my annual renewal process in XXXX of XXXX, I was told by a representative that their paperwork processing time is 30 days. ) I then asked to be escalated to the manager. The manager told me they could expedite my paperwork so it would be processed in 3-5 days, but they could not confirm that it would be applied to my XXXX payment. I then asked to speak with her manager. Her manager told me that he could not confirm that the recalculation would be applied to my XXXX payment, and also that expediting my paperwork was also not an option. I then asked to speak with his manager, at which time I was sent to the Resolution Department. XXXX in the Resolution Dept told me that they would not confirm the recalculation would be applied to my XXXX payment because " while there is a 30 day processing time, we require an additional XXXX days to apply the changes to your account. '' I then asked XXXX to verbally confirm that while their policy states 30 days of processing time, they also have an additional 3-5 days processing time. She confirmed this was the case, which was not consistent with what I had been told in XXXX XXXX. I asked XXXX to email me this in writing, which she declined to do. I asked for her contact information, which she declined to provide. After asking why there was no way to contact her directly, she gave me her telephone extension. I then asked to be transferred to her manager, which she declined to do. After more discussion she agreed to send me to her manager 's voicemail, but then she hung up on me. All of this took more than 30 minutes. I simply would like to have my paperwork processed within the 30 days I was told it would be, and have my XXXX payment reflect my new salary.
Company Response:
State: DC
Zip: 20011
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-23
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-03-18
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Don't agree with fees charged
Consumer Complaint: I need to submit yearly income documentation to my student loan servicer, Nelnet, to recalculate my income based repayment. Nelnet told me I had a specific deadline by which to complete this. However, they had set a different, earlier deadline, which if I had not submitted by then, they would switch me to a standard plan and capitalize all of the accrued interest. I know that switching from IBR will capitalize interest -- however, I submitted the required documents by the deadline they told me. But they had capitalized my interest a few weeks before that.
Company Response:
State: TX
Zip: 78746
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-18
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-03-17
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Received bad information about my loan
Consumer Complaint: I was told this XX/XX/XXXX that my Income based repayment plan would continue as long as I provided my tax information each year. Which I 'm sure I read when I started the XXXX many years ago. However I was never told what my calendar year anniversary was, or a specific date. Rather that I had just to provide my tax info once I had it. Now I realize that each year they 've added interest to my principle while I waited for my tax info to arrive and then to file it. The representative at Nelnet never stated a specific date but just a general statement, He said " once you 've got your tax info turn it in to us to continue with the XXXX ''. I 've just been told today by another representative at Nelnet that my XXXX lapsed for a period and over {$3000.00} has now been added to my principle and there 's nothing that can be done about that.That 's equal to or more than I will make in payments ... I can only guess that this has happened each year and they just gladly applied that to my principle but never called me to state if we do n't get " X '' information by this date you will get booted from the IBR. This is a terrible and deceptive business practice.
Company Response:
State: MO
Zip: 64151
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: No
Date Received: 2016-03-14
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Received bad information about my loan
Consumer Complaint: I, XXXX XXXX, am the cosigner on a Nelnet Parent Plus loan that my father took out for my brother who was a student at the time. My brother graduated from XXXX University in XXXX 2015 and the first loan payment was due XXXX 2015. My brother had been making consistent payments on his loans and each time he called, he confirmed the full loan balance. As a consequence, my brother, his father and I believed that we were making payments toward a consolidated loan balance that included the amount of the Parent Plus loan. We have come to realize that this was not the case after I received a negative comment on my credit report stating that I have failed to be current on a credit/loan account. When any of the parties to the loan call to find out what the responsibility is, the representative does not share any information on this loan unless you ask them specifically about any loan where there is a cosigner. This makes it very difficult to know my responsibility as a cosigner and has hurt my creditworthiness.
Company Response:
State: NY
Zip: 11221
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes
Date Received: 2016-03-14
Issue: Dealing with my lender or servicer
Subissue: Trouble with how payments are handled
Consumer Complaint: Today [ XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ] I made a phone to Nelnet & spoke to a Nelnet Representative [ " XXXX '' ] to help supply me with clear answers in addressing some of my concerns.XXXX answers did not correspond to much of the information provided on the website. XXXX 1A ] - WHAT IS THIS 3 YEAR 'PROBATION '' PERIOD & WHY IS THE SUCH EMPHASIS PLACED ON THE POWER TO REACTIVATE THE 'DISCHARGED '' LOAN? IF THE LOAN IS TRULY & LEGALLY DISCHARGED ; WOULD N'T I RECEIVE FORM XXXX? THE USE OF THE WORD, " DISCHARGE '' IS MISLEADING & DISTORTED. * THE TELNET REPRESENTATIVE [ XXXX ] EXPLAINED THAT THE DISCHARGE THAT IS REFERRED TO ON THEIR WEBSITE INFORMATION IS NOT A FINAL [ REAL? ] DISCHARGE. IN THE EVENT THAT IT WAS " THE FINAL DISCHARGE '' ; I WOULD BE SENT FORM XXXX. * " If I 'm subject to a 3-year post-discharge monitoring period, what will happen during the monitoring period? '' 1B ] -IF I 'VE BEEN XXXX FOR A PERIOD OF GREATER THAN 3 YEAR TIME PERIOD ; WHY CA N'T I PRESENT A PRINT-OUT OF MY BANK RECORDS & TAX STATEMENTS OF THE PAST 3 YEARS TO PROVE THAT I 'M IN & HAVE BEEN IN COMPLIANCE OF THIS CRITERIA THAT NELNET [ THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ] INSISTS ARE NECESSARY TO JUSTIFY THIS " ALMOST '' DISCHARGE PROBATION PERIOD? * XXXX ] -WHY DOES NELNET [ A.K.A.- THE XXXX DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ] ONLY RECOGNIZE MY XXXX IN XX/XX/XXXX WHEN NATIONAL & STATE AGENCIES HAVE RECORDED MY XXXX IN XX/XX/XXXX? IS THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION MORE MEDICALLY QUALIFIED THAN THE MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS REPRESENTING THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES & THE DEPT OF SOCIAL SECURITY XXXX, IN ADDITION TO MANY PRIVATE SPECIALISTS & PHYSICIANS IN THE ABILITY TO DIAGNOSE & MAKE AN ACCURATE DETERMINATION IN REGARD TO MY XXXX? THIS MEANS THAT ANY MONEY THAT WAS GARNISHED FROM ME-BEFORE THE APPLICATION OF XXXX WAS DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RETURNED ... * " What happens if the Department approves my XXXX discharge request? " Link : XXXX 2A ] - WHAT RIGHTS/AUTHORITY/EXPERTISE/QUALIFICATIONS DOES THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS OF DETERMINING AN INDIVIDUAL 'S XXXX? I ACCORDING TO NELNET, THE DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED BY THE DEPT OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION IS NOT ENOUGH-AS THESE RECORDS ARE REVIEWED BY NELNET [? ] & THEN FORWARDED TO THE US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION FOR THEIR REVIEW. * What should I do if I want to apply for a XXXX discharge? Link : XXXX 3 ] -WHY DOES THE NELNET WEBSITE PROVIDE CONSUMERS WITH FALSE INFORMATION? " Finally, we 'll contact your loan holders and instruct them to suspend collection activity on your loans for a period of up to 120 days. This means that during the 120-day period you will not be required to make payments on your loans. '' * I WAS TOLD ON THE PHONE BY THE NELNET REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE GARNISHMENTS WOULD & LEGALLY COULD BE CONTINUED. NELNET COULD DO NOTHING TO ADDRESS OR PREVENT FUTURE GARNISHMENTS. I WAS TOLD THAT NELNET WOULD NOT SPEAK TO MY LOAN HOLDER [ THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ] I WAS INFORMED THAT IT WAS UP TO ME TO SPEAK TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION [ MY LOAN HOLDER AT XXXX ] IN ORDER TO ATTEMPT TO STOP THE GARNISHMENTS. THIS LATEST NEW INFORMATION SEEMED TO STRONGLY IMPLY SOME ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENT & PROCESS OF APPLYING FOR A " HARDSHIP '' WITH MY LOAN HOLDER. * " Discharge Processing/How long does the XXXX discharge application process take? / Our review of your XXXX discharge application typically takes less than 30 days to complete. THE RESPONSE OF THE NELNET REPRESENTATIVE [ XXXX ] WAS THAT COULD REQUIRE UP TO 120 DAYS TO REVIEW THE CASE & PROCURE THE ANSWER AS TO WHETHER YOU QUALIFIED FOR THE " FAKE '' [ NOT FINAL ] DISCHARGE. DURING THIS 120 DAY REVIEW TIME FRAME ; THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IS STILL FREE TO GARNISH MY XXXX PAYMENT UNLESS OTHER ARRANGEMENTS HAD BEEN MADE.
Company Response:
State: MN
Zip: 563XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2016-03-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: Yes