Consumer complaint received 2019-07-02
Company: Navient Solutions, LLC.
State: AL
Product: Student loan
Sub-product: Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer
Sub-issue: Trouble with how payments are being handled

Complaint:
Navient is intentionally misallocating overpayments/payments to maintain maximum interest accruements on portions of a consolidated loan to prevent loan bearer from paying off the loan quicker. 

1. On XX/XX/XXXX, Navient intentionally applied {$61.00} of an overpayment to the larger ( XXXX DL ) current balance loan, when allocation was supposed to go to the smaller current balance ( XXXX DL ) loan ( all accrued interest obligations on both portions were met ). 

2. On XX/XX/XXXX, Navient intentionally split an overpayment applying {$77.00} towards the larger ( XXXX DL ) current balance loan with {$84.00} going to the smaller ( XXXX DL ) loan balance, when the total ( {$160.00} ) was supposed to go to the smaller loan balance ( all accrued interest obligations of both portions were met ). 

3. In XX/XX/XXXX, Navient intentionally allocated overpayments in the amount of {$280.00} to interest on the larger ( XXXX DL ) loan and allocated overpayments in the amount of {$200.00} to interest on the smaller ( XXXX DL ) loan. A total of {$490.00} was applied to interest in the month of XXXX alone which is inconsistent with the interest estimator typical monthly payments ~ {$210.00} for both loans in interest accruements. This over-allocation of interest to both loans should have rather been applied to the principal balance on ANY loan, especially the smaller current balance loan as stated and requested ( interest obligations were met and paid. ) 4. In XX/XX/XXXX, Navient intentionally allocated overpayments in the amount of {$260.00} to interest on the larger ( XXXX DL ) loan and allocated overpayments in the amount of {$180.00} to interest on the smaller ( XXXX DL ) loan. A total of {$440.00} was applied to interest in the month of XXXX alone which is inconsistent with the interest estimator typical monthly payments ~ {$210.00} for both loans in interest accruements. This over-allocation of interest to both loans should have rather been applied to the principal balance on ANY loan, especially the smaller current balance loan as stated and requested ( interest obligations were met and paid. ) 5. In XX/XX/XXXX, Navient intentionally allocated overpayments in the amount of {$270.00} to interest on the larger ( XXXX DL ) loan and allocated overpayments in the amount of {$190.00} to interest on the smaller ( XXXX DL ) loan, which contrasts the ~ $ XXXX/month ( based on interest rate, which did not change ). A total of {$440.00} was applied to interest in the month of XXXX alone which is inconsistent with the interest estimator typical monthly payments ~ {$210.00} for both loans in interest accruements. This over-allocation of interest to both loans should have rather been applied to the principal balance on ANY/EITHER loan as state and requested ( interest obligations were met and paid. ) Examples of similar systematic misallocation activities continued on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ( 6 ), and throughout history of loans back to XXXX. 

Navient also steered me away from income-driven repayment plans and lured me into multiple forbearances and consolidating the loans which were clearly not in the best interest of the loan bearer. Consolidation of multiple loans went into effect XX/XX/XXXX and disbursement payment requirements starting in XXXX. IDR should/would have been the most beneficial and practical since XXXX.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation