Consumer complaint received 2020-05-31
Company: Nelnet, Inc.
State: WI
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Private student loan debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt was paid

Complaint:
On XX/XX/XXXX I, XXXX XXXX XXXX received a letter from Firstmark Services - a Division of Nelnet asserting to me that I owe them {$26000.00} for a student loan that was originated with XXXX XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX. This letter states that they want {$530.00} each month for 62 months with last payment amount of {$520.00} due on XX/XX/XXXX. The account number listed on this letter is XXXX Note ID : XXXX. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, after opening and reading the above referenced and attached letter, I, XXXX XXXX XXXX, called Firstmark Services at XXXX to discuss this matter. I spoke with a representative by the name of XXXX and explained that the loan referenced in the above state and attached letter from Firstmark Services has been reported on my credit reports ( attached ) since XXXX as Paid and has shown with a Balance of {$0.00}. I asked XXXX how an account that has been reported as Paid, Closed and with a Balance of {$0.00} can all of a sudden turn into the bill referenced above and attached herein. XXXX transferred me to his supervisor whose name was XXXX. 

In my conversation with XXXX, I asked her the same and she informed me that their system ( Firstmark ) shows the balance, status and payment indicated in the letter from Firstmark dated XX/XX/XXXX of which is attached and referenced above. I told XXXX that I have printouts of my credit reports dating back many years. On those reports, I informed her that Firstmark does not even appear on any of the three bureaus ( XXXX, XXXX  and XXXX ) until XXXX. I went on to state how the XXXX Credit Reports in which Firstmark first appears show the account as Closed. I further stated that in XXXX and continuing into XXXX and to date, that the Firstmark account number, referenced above and referenced in the attached and aforementioned letter from Firstmark dated XX/XX/XXXX, all show the account status as Closed and the account balance of {$0.00}. I asked how I can all of a sudden owe {$26000.00} on an account that has been reported as Closed and with a Balance of {$0.00} for about three years. She stated that if I wanted to send over my copies of the credit reports I referenced, that they ( Firstmark ) would be happy to review them and reach out to the original lender to see if they need to update their records and suppress the account. 

I informed XXXX that I have an attorney that I have retained and that I would discuss the above letter and phone call with him. I offered to give her his name and information so as to have her indicate on the account my attorneys name and information. She said she would not take his information over the phone but that I should fill out a Release of Authorization Form of which she would and did email to me so that Firstmark would be able to speak with my attorney regarding this matter. I did receive that form and have since completed it and emailed it to Firstmark Services at XXXX. That form is also attached herein and a copy of that form and all others are being furnished to my Attorney, XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, WI. XXXX. 

After my conversation with XXXX at Firstmark on XX/XX/XXXX, I have further researched my credit reports ( attached herein ) and analyzed the situation. My synopsis of the genesis and evolution of this matter is as follows. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX Acc # XXXX was originated in XX/XX/XXXX. That is the same month and year of which Firstmark claims to have originated. Therefore, it is logical to conclude that Firstmark is claiming to be collecting on behalf of the XXXX XXXX XXXX account referenced above. From XX/XX/XXXX through to XXXX ( per my records ) that XXXX XXXX XXXX account has reported its Balance, its Status and its payment history. Firstmark was never on my reports nor did I have any business relationship with nor have knowledge of any entity by the name of Firstmark at that time. 

The XX/XX/XXXX XXXX  Credit Reports ( attached ) show XXXX XXXX XXXX Acc # XXXX as Closed and Debt Included in or Discharged through Bankruptcy Ch XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX  shows the XXXX XXXX XXXX Acc # XXXX as Closed and with a Balance of {$0.00}. 

Firstmark shows up on my credit reports for the first time on XX/XX/XXXX in my XXXX and XXXX reports ( attached ) of the same date. They reflect the account as Closed and XXXX shows the Balance reported as {$0.00}. On XX/XX/XXXX, my attached XXXX report reflects Firstmark Account # XXXX as Closed and with a Balance of {$0.00}. 

On XX/XX/XXXX, my XXXX Credit report ( attached ) shows Firstmark Account # XXXX as Closed and with a Balance of {$0.00} on all three Bureaus ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ). On XX/XX/XXXX, I pulled all three Bureaus Reports ( XXXX, XXXX and XXXX ) separately and have attached them to this complaint. On all three of those Bureaus reports dated XX/XX/XXXX, Firstmark Acc # XXXX shows as Closed with a Balance of {$0.00}. XXXX XXXX XXXX Acc # XXXX continually shows the Closed status and the Balance of {$0.00} through to current day. 

It appears that Firstmark acquired this alleged debt sometime between XX/XX/XXXX, when it was still not on my credit report and XX/XX/XXXX when it first appears. I never received any communication from Firstmark until XX/XX/XXXX in the letter referenced at the beginning of this communication. 

The Consumer Financial Protection Act is enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB typically brings enforcement actions under a combination of the applicable federal consumer protection statutes listed below and Dodd-Franks Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 ( CFPA ). The CFPAs prohibition on unfair and deceptive acts and practices ( UDAAP ) is its chief enforcement mechanism. In its revised Education Loan Exam Procedures, the CFPB explains how examiners review student loan servicers compliance with federal consumer financial law. The CFPB listed the following as potentially unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices with respect to lenders and servicers interactions with consumers : An act or practice is deceptive under the CFPA, if : [ 1 ] there is a representation or omission likely to mislead consumers acting reasonably under the circumstances ; and [ 2 ] the representation or omission is material. 
An act or practice is unfair when : ( 1 ) it causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers, ( 2 ) consumers can not reasonably avoid the injury ; and ( 3 ) the injury is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition. 
An abusive act or practice is one that : ( 1 ) materially interferes with a consumers ability to understand a term or condition of a consumer financial product or service ; or ( 2 ) takes unreasonable advantage of : [ a ] a consumers lack of understanding of the material risks, costs, or conditions of the product or service, [ b ] a consumers inability to protect its interests in selecting or using a consumer financial product or service, or [ c ] the consumer reasonably relies on a covered person to act in the consumers interest. 

I assert that reporting an account as Closed and with a Balance of {$0.00} from XXXX through to current day XXXX and then, in XX/XX/XXXX, stating that it is Open and has a balance of {$26000.00} is deceptive. 

I assert that reporting an account as Closed and with a Balance of {$0.00} from XXXX through to current day XXXX and then, in XX/XX/XXXX, stating that it is Open and has a balance of {$26000.00} is Unfair. It causes substantial harm to me, the consumer who could not have prepared for a debt of which has been Paid and reported as a Balance of {$0.00} for over three years now. 

I assert that reporting an account as Closed and with a Balance of {$0.00} from XXXX through to current day XXXX and then, in XX/XX/XXXX, stating that it is Open and has a balance of {$26000.00} is an abusive act or practice in that Firstmarks reporting to XXXX, XXXX  and XXXX clearly state that the alleged debt is Paid, Closed and has a Balance of {$0.00}. To try and re-write history in XX/XX/XXXX and state that this alleged debt is anything other than what they themselves have reported, materially interferes with my, the consumers, ability to understand the terms and conditions of this alleged debt. 

Based upon the above, Firstmark must correct its systems to reflect the information it has reported to XXXX, XXXX and XXXX since XXXX thereby listing the alleged debt as Paid, Closed and with a Balance of {$0.00}.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation