The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, act as legal, financial or credit advice; instead, it is for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not be current. This website may contain links to other third-party websites. Such links are only for the convenience of the reader, user or browser; we do not recommend or endorse the contents of any third-party sites. Readers of this website should contact their attorney, accountant or credit counselor to obtain advice with respect to their particular situation. No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or not act on the basis of information on this site. Always seek personal legal, financial or credit advice for your relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney or advisor can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this website or any of the links or resources contained within the site do not create an attorney-client or fiduciary relationship between the reader, user, or browser and website owner, authors, contributors, contributing firms, or their respective employers.
Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them. Compensation is not a factor in the substantive evaluation of any product.
Last month, while the Senate and House were playing Texas Hold ‘Em with student loan interest rates (the college kids lost that hand), the Federal Student Aid office at the Department of Education was busy reshuffling the deck.
In a post dated July 26, an FSA operations director described how education loans that are currently being serviced by a company that will soon be departing the Direct Loan program are to be transitioned to other DOE subcontractors. Loan servicer replacements occur periodically, for all kinds of reasons, and certainly we don’t know why this particular change is happening at this particular time.
A quick search of the exiting company’s name revealed many complaints. But then I searched the ones that are still in the game and combined what I read online with the stories I’ve heard from borrowers who emailed and phoned. A number of those companies have problems too.
There are complaints about misapplications of principal payments, where extra remittances that were explicitly directed to be applied against unpaid loan balances were instead credited against future payments (which save borrowers nothing). And those who are struggling, and might otherwise have qualified for one of the government’s longer-term relief programs such as the Pay As You Earn and Public Service Loan Forgiveness plans were instead shunted into deferments and forbearances that amounted to little more than a negatively amortizing time-out.
Forbearance is not forgiveness. When the relief involves a reduction in payment — or even a suspension of all payments for a period of time — the unremitted interest is added to the unpaid loan balance, at which point more interest is assessed on the higher amount resulting in even higher payments for the remainder of the term.
Loan servicing companies are in many cases hired hands: intermediaries that stand in between the institutions that make the loans (or the investor groups to whom these loans were later sold) and the borrowers who make the payments. But they’re not doing this work out of the goodness of their hearts — they’re in it to make money. The question is whether their compensation-driven objectives are at cross-purposes with the legitimate interests of the borrowers they’ve been subcontracted to serve.
Good loan servicing helps stave off loan defaults, and staving off loan defaults saves consumer-taxpayers money. It doesn’t matter if the loans are government-guaranteed or privately financed — loan losses are ultimately passed on in the form of higher borrowing costs, which consume tax dollars.
Therefore, it stands to reason that the nation’s largest higher-education lender — the federal government — should lead the way by mandating a set of loan servicing standards that include:
Thereafter, each loan servicer’s performance could then be evaluated by monitoring:
Contrary to what some may believe, the vast majority of borrowers — including those who are down on their luck — want to honor their financial obligations. One thing, though: What they need are for lenders, investors and their subcontractors to help them do just that when trouble hits. That means a fair deal — not a hand that’s dealt from the bottom of the deck.
This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not represent the views of the company or its affiliates.
Image: iStockphoto
August 26, 2020
Student Loans
August 4, 2020
Student Loans
July 31, 2020
Student Loans