Product: Student loan

In Wells Fargo 's response to complaints XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XXXX } dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, Wells Fargo instructs me to provide them with documentation of " attendance '' of my internship activity. I supplied such documents as attachments to to complaint XXXX. Specifically, I supplied : 1 ) the image of myself with identification as an intern on the fellowship page, 2 ) W2 for XXXX listing the total sums earned over the summer internship for XXXX. Wells Fargo 's response to XXXX was : " We have reviewed the documents you shared with regard to your internship forbearance request and regret to inform you that these documents are not sufficient to review your student loan account for an Internship/Residency or Fellowship forbearance. " Wells Fargo provided no guidance on what type of documentation they would require to process and review such a request and what per their policy constitutes " attendance at an internship activity. '' Wells Fargo willfully fails to understand that interns at a government facility are subject to the same rules governing the handling of UNCLASSIFIED/FOUO documents that may identify me with the internship. This applies to papers and emails I may generate, including communications between my internship supervisor, etc. Those practices help keep all of us safe. 

I would like to point out that if Wells Fargo allows internship forbearance requests over the phone, and if those requests follow the same format for in-school forbearance, then no documentation of the internship forbearance would have been required at the time of my internship and my information would be recorded. It is only now that Wells Fargo failed to make me aware that I was eligible for an internship forbearance that I am now subject to extra scrutiny. 

Given the backdrop of the current XXXX pandemic, and Wells Fargo 's announcement of their intent to sell their student loan portfolio, no less during a time of economic despair for many, it seems likely that the consistent denials and stalling by Wells Fargo are tactics being employed to force my student loan into repayment so that their student loan portfolio looks that much better for ANY potential buyer of that portfolio. 

Now, I am attaching additional documentation proving that I was an intern at a government facility for both XXXX and XXXX. It shows that I was contractually obligated to conduct internship activities as a part of my fellowship program. Mainly, I am attaching the executed agreement between myself and my academic institution that indicates my agreement to participate in internship activities as a condition of my fellowship. Secondly, I am attaching two ( 2 ) pay-stubs from the first few weeks of my internship. Third, I am attaching a Letter of Intent from the DIRECTOR OF THE FACILITY that states specifically I was an intern for the summer of XXXX and that the facility intended to have me back for XXXX as an intern. Finally, I will reattach the W2, and the offer letters. 

None of this behavior is new and a timeline of Wells Fargo 's behavior/ attempts to stall, fight, ignore forbearance request since XXXX of XXXX is hereafter. Furthermore, they have already admitted to furnishing inaccurate/incorrect information regarding my student loans to the credit reporting agencies. 

On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Ms. XXXX XXXX responded to complaint XXXX. Wells Fargo 's XXXX XX/XX/XXXX interim response was " Wells Fargo needs additional time to research and respond to our customer '' In Ms. XXXX XXXX 's response she states : " Please see the attached Bank response, '' and attaches a XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response. To clarify my complaint ( not concern ) against Wells Fargo is because they have refused to give me forbearance options I was entitled to per their policies. That is for the periods of XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX, and the periods XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX I was an intern at a government research lab. Wells Fargo has a specific deferment program for internships. If Wells Fargo offers forbearance for internships, then equal protection requires them to offer that forbearance option as well -- they did not. The denial matters because Wells Fargo EFS subsequently denied my request for an in-school forbearance for periods XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX claiming that maximum in-school forbearance had been used. However, had Wells Fargo placed me in the internship forbearance, then the maximum amount of in-school forbearance time as granted XX/XX/XXXX would not have been exhausted, even if a manual review was conducted. Six ( 6 ) months of forbearance time would have been freed up from in-school forbearance and I would thus have been able to obtain an in-school forbearance thru XX/XX/XXXX. Combined with the forbearance offered commensurate with the CARES Act, I would have been able to push the payments out until XX/XX/XXXX, which was my initial request in XX/XX/XXXX that WF denied. The scheme here is quite obvious. On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX published an article quotes Wells Fargos website as stating beginning on XX/XX/XXXX, only customers with an outstanding balance on a Wells Fargo Private Student Loan are eligible to be borrowers on a new private student loan for the XXXX academic year. In the article XXXX XXXX, a spokesperson for Wells Fargo is quoted as saying Wells Fargo has decided to narrow its student-lending focus. On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX published an article stating that Wells Fargo is exploring a sale of its corporate-trust unit that could fetch more than {$1.00} XXXX and is considering whether to find a buyer for its student-loan portfolio, according to people familiar with the matter. The article goes on to say Wells Fargo holds a {$10.00} XXXX student-loan portfolio. The bank said earlier this month that it had notified customers of its planned exit from the student-lending business. As my payments began in XXXX of XXXX, WF is reporting adverse credit information to compel me, a student of non-traditional age, with a documented XXXX  XXXX, from a minority background, to obtain employment during a pandemic so that they can offset the XXXX  XXXX interest income losses of 19 percent. By forcing students into repayment during a pandemic they are attempting to hedge their losses due in the low-interest rate environment while they seek ways to divest themselves of their XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX dollar student loan portfolio during the economic crisis to mitigate any additional losses that may affect their bottom line post-pandemic due to economic damage caused by the pandemic. 

On XXXX XXXX my account was placed into a forbearance status due to COVID-19. As of XXXX XXXX Wells Fargo lists one sub-account as being paid on-time for XX/XX/XXXX. The second sub account lists a XXXX payment as late by XXXXhirty ( 30 ) days and Both sub accounts are due on the same day of each month. I have received zero bills since forbearance was initiated. I have confirmation of being placed in forbearance as of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. The notion that I may somehow be able to retrieve an electronic bill even if I do not receive a bill in the mail presupposes that I have access to the internet at all times. It takes no note that I may not have internet access due to service interruptions caused by late payments due to loss or delay of financial deposits on account of the pandemic. Furthermore, CFPB statutes and enforcement require that a bill be mailed to me each month as a part of right of notice under due process. No notice can be received if the bill never reaches me. Further, a bill that is " generated '' but never mailed by Wells Fargo. does not suffice as notice. Finally a bill that is generated outside of the established billing period, per the first bill, is not allowed under CFPB statutes and enforcement. Now, this mismanagement of account information by Wells Fargo is not new. On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, Mr. XXXX XXXX responded to Wells Fargo complaints XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and XXXX. To date Wells Fargo has offered me no relief for improper billing practices, nor relief for improper credit reporting. In fact, XXXX XXXX contends that Wells Fargo is provided accurate information both to myself and the CRAs. XXXX XXXX concurs with my assertion regarding the timing of my first bill, " Your first payment for loan account XXXX XXXX and XXXX was XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, a monthly billing statement was mailed to your attention, which stated your payment due date would be XX/XX/XXXX. '' However, he switches tactics when addressing all subsequent statement generation dates and instead refers to the date a payment is due, " On XX/XX/XXXX, your monthly billing statement was mailed showing your payment due date of XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, your billing statement was mailed showing the payment due date of XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, you billing statement was mailed showing the payment due date of XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, your billing statement was mailed showing the payment due date of XX/XX/XXXX. I have enclosed copies for your review. '' He then excoriates me stating, " our statement was mailed on XX/XX/XXXX, allowing you more than a 20-day notice before your first payment due date, as we provide our customers coming out of a loan forbearance additional time to make payment arrangements for their loan accounts. '' To further his point he writes regarding my MPN signed with a now defunct banking institution, " 'I am not relieved of my responsibly and obligation to make such payments if I do not receive billing statements, and any other written payment notices from you. ' XXXX XXXX is tacitly attempting to provide an explanation as to why it is acceptable for Wells Fargo to be non-compliant with Consent Order XXXX and violate the CFPB interpretation of 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ) 1026.2 Definitions and rules of construction, effectively claiming that while Wells Fargo did not generate and provide me statements per Federal Law, their failure has no bearing on my payment history, status of my account, etc, because I am supposed to blindly make payments without consistent generation of statements. Effectively asserting, flaunting of federal law has caused no harm to me as a consumer even if their billing practices are illegal under 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ) 1026.2 Definitions and rules of construction. Now, under 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ) 1026.2 Definitions and rules of construction, while there is a permissible variance to account for weekends, holidays, and differences in the number of days in months, billing cycles MUST BE EQUAL. In this context equal requires that the actual date of EACH statement not vary by more than four ( 4 ) days from a fixed day or date. The interval between the statement with date XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and the next subsequent statement generated on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX clearly falls outside the statutory definition of equal as applied to billing cycles for my student loans. Again XXXX XXXX asserts that I have not been harmed. XXXX XXXX then goes on to assert that my payment history is accurate and provides dates from his computing system sowing when payments were made. In fact he is so confident with the screen dumb from the system which he uses for such data that he closed out complaint XXXX. Contrary to XXXX XXXX 's claim of reported payment history only furnished to the CRAs for XX/XX/XXXX, Wells Fargo is currently reporting history thru XX/XX/XXXX, which as stated in XXXX is causally impossible given XXXX XXXX 's acknowledgment of the due date of the twenty-seventh ( XXXX ) of each month. That is Wells Fargo is reporting history thru XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, when the date of this complaint is XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. So, contrary to XXXX XXXX 's claim regarding no harm to me as a consumer for their illegal billing practices, I have been harmed. The inconsistency in their statement generation as established by the first ( 1st ) billing statement generation on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, and their second statement generation date on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX falls outside of the established date of XXXX day of each month and the harm caused by such is reflected in their system reporting causally impossible payment history to the CRAs. For example, Wells Fargo is supplying information to at least one ( 1 ) of the major three ( 3 ) CRAs in which my payment history goes from being reported to on-time for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, to suddenly being reported sixty ( 60 ) days past-due. Mr. XXXX XXXX 's statement to the CRA on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX are clear in that my first payment was not due until XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. So it is logically impossible that my payments would be suddenly past-due sixty ( 60 ) days for the period of XX/XX/XXXX. Nevertheless, Wells Fargo is reporting the inaccurate history to XXXX  and XXXX. This is in obvious contradiction to what Ms. XXXX XXXX claims WF is reporting to the CRAs. Moreover, WF is supplying payment history claiming that I am XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or more days late for the month of XXXX when the date for neither the payment due XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, nor the payment due XXXX XXXX would be thirty ( 30 ) days past-due -- today is XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. If this was a simple reporting error caused by the system of a single CRA, it would be one thing. Clearly this is inaccurate and unverifiable information that is being reported to at least all three ( 3 ) major CRAs. The somewhat seriousness, but hilarity in all of this is that there is a specific portion of XXXX XXXX 's response that acknowledges consent order violations, " We appreciate your concern about the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) announcement ; we are taking all appropriate steps to remedy the concerns. Your feedback is very important to us. We hope to have a future opportunity to meet and exceed your service expectations.We are deeply committed to serving you and your financial needs. It is important for you to know that making things right and restoring the faith you have in us is the very top priority for our entire Wells Fargo leadership team. Nothing is more important than for you to experience the very best from us moving forward. '' So XXXX XXXX acknowledges that Wells Fargo is in violation of XXXX and that Wells Fargo is taking steps to remedy the non-compliance I pointed out. However, despite the illegal billing practices in violation of XXXX, and outside what is permissible under statute, Wells Fargo will do nothing to ameliorate the harm they have already caused me due to inaccurate reporting of payment history. These practices are not new, as the CFPB has issued consent orders in the past for this same behavior from Wells Fargo, specifically citing the following violations : ( 1 ) unfair and deceptive practices related to payment allocation in violation of Sections 1031 and 1036 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 ( CFPA ), 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536 ; ( 2 ) unfair practices related to payment aggregation in violation of Sections 1031 and 1036 of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536 ; ( 3 ) unlawful practices related to payment aggregation in violation of Section 623 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 2 ), and Section 1022.42 of Regulation V, 12 C.F.R. 1022.42 ( a ) ; and ( 4 ) unfair practices related to the assessment of late fees in violation of Sections 1031 and 1036 of the CFPA, 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536. Per CFPB consent order 2016-CFPB-0013, the negative account information that Wells Fargo is submitting to the CRAs is incorrect and must be immediately removed. At the end of the day, Wells Fargo is doing a dance. On one hand they admit they are outside of what is statutorily permissible. However, they insist that no harm has been done because " I still have to make payments on my student loans. '' They fail to understand that the mysterious change in statement generation date between the first two ( 2 ) consecutive statements of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, presents itself causally impossible payment history thru XXXX XX/XX/XXXX that is supplied thru eOSCAR to the CRAs. Each time I attempt to dispute this fact with XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX, Wells Fargo 's computing system supplies the same erroneous information. The bottom line is that errors in Wells Fargo 's own systems has caused consistent damage to my credit files since XX/XX/XXXX. Any reasonable company would take efforts to correct the situation to make me whole. Wells Fargo appears not to want to do such. To date WF has not stated they will fix the problem regarding the supply of causally impossible payment history to the CRAs for my student loans. So it would seem that WF will continue to cause harm to me as a consumer, and perhaps other consumers, with full knowledge that they are doing such, while providing no relief to me. On one hand, Wells Fargo is will to partially acknowledge the errors, but then on the other hand claim that they are reporting factually accurate payment history, and seeking to deflect away from their own behavior by quoting a clause within my loan origination documents that they acquired from a now defunct banking institution. While the clause in the loan origination document is amorphous at best in that I may still owe the alleged amount on a loan, Mr. XXXX XXXX 's claim that the clause excuses WF compliance with federal statute is absurd. The CFPB 's interpretation of 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ) 1026 is clear. Wells Fargo is not absolved of compliance to consent orders/ consent decrees, nor shields Wells Fargo from the CFPB 's enforcement of applicable statute. Wells Fargo is exhibiting behavior that is non-compliant with XXXX and is admitting they are in violation of 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ) XXXX. Wells Fargo appears content not to correct the problems with the information they are supplying to the CRAs and thus are indifferent to the harm they have caused and will continue to cause to me as a consumer.