Product: Student loan

The borrower experienced XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX infections from XXXX through XXXX. After each XXXX XXXX the borrower struggled for periods in excess of one ( XXXX ) year with XXXX. The borrower has XXXX and his symptoms include processing nominal levels of light and sound as physical pain. The borrower manages his XXXX with a combination of medications, XXXX of which has been in sortt supply since XX/XX/XXXX and now affects the class of medications used to treat ADHD. The combined pathology of long-COVID and ADHD qualifies the borrower as an individual with a XXXX under the ADA ( 28 C.F.R. 36.105 ). The nature of the disability renders the borrower unable to write, speak, think, or communicate. The borrower and a coborrower took out a private student loan in XXXX with XXXX to pay for the borrower 's education expenses. The coborrower is now in their nineties. In XXXX XXXX XXXX acquired XXXX and the loan was transferred to XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX exited the student loan business and sold its loan portfolio in XXXX to XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, which is serviced by Firstmark Services. For the period XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX Firsmark sent multiple billing statements and payment reminders to incorrect addresses. The borrower made several attempts to correct the address information and notified Firstmark of the billing errors. FM acts or practices allowed cascading skip-tracing to occur from XX/XX/XXXX until XX/XX/XXXX, causing multiple payments to be reported late because statements were not received by the borrower. Those statements were instead mailed to addresses where neither the borrower nor coborrower receives mail. Consequentially, Firstmark furnished payment history to the CRAs indicating late payments by up to sixty ( XXXX ) days covering the period XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. The borrower requested relief from Firstmark to include removal of the derogatory payment history spanning XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX because it is false/incomplete/inaccurate/misleading. Firstmark has declined to offer relief alleging no basis in law to cease its normal servicing practices. Firstmark has continued to blame the borrower for the billing errors alleging he did not contact them to let them know the addresses were invalid. The borrower has notified Firstmark of the incorrect address information in complaint filings to the CFPB. The borrower has found an e-mail from XXXX XX/XX/XXXX that shows Firstmark knew the address they were mailing statements to was not an address at which the borrower receives mail. Each of Firstmark 's written responses to the CFPB complants have instructed the borrower to subject himself to additional pain by enrolling in electronic statements so that the borrower may counteract any of Firstmarks future billing errors. On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, a Firstmark representative asked the borrower if he would be interested in a Release Authorization Form. The representative explained the form would allow a designated individual to discuss the status of his account to include updating address information, and payments due. At no point did an agent of Firstmark inform the borrower the form existed before XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. Firstmark Services is a covered person and is subject to the CFPB 's enforcement authority ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) ). The payment history furnished by Firstmark to the XXXX from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX is a consequence of Firstmark 's own unfair ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ( c ) ), deceptive ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ), abusive ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ( d ) ), unlawful ( 12 U.S.C 5536 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) as covered person, 15 U.S.C. 1681e and 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 as data furnisher ), and discriminatory ( 28 C.F.R. 36.105, and 42 U.S.C. 12182 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( A ) ( ii ) ) acts or practices. While the borrower would like to resolve the matter informally, the borrower will pursue litigation that requests injunctive relief, statutory amounts, punitive amounts, and amounts for direct and indirect losses, emotional damage, and loss of reputation. The borrower has submitted a Civil Rights complaint with DoJ.