Complaint sub-issue: Information belongs to someone else

FTC VIOLATIONS ENCLOSED AND ATTACH DOC 'S PLEASE REMOVE ALL THE FTC VIOLATIONS PROVEN BY THE COURTS AND THE FTC SHARE THIS PAGE XXXX XXXX XXXX FOR XXXX XX/XX/2019 TAGS : deceptive/misleading conduct Bureau of Consumer Protection XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX and  XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX The Federal Trade Commission charged the operators of two similar student loan debt relief schemes, and a financing company that assisted them, with bilking millions of dollars from consumers. 

The defendants allegedly charged illegal upfront fees that they led consumers to believe went towards consumers student loans, and falsely promised that their services would permanently lower or even eliminate consumers loan payments or balances. The defendants also signed customers up for high-interest loans to pay the fees without making required disclosures. 

In one action, brought jointly by the FTC and the State of Minnesota, the student debt relief company and the financing company involved agreed to be banned from the debt relief business in order to settle the charges. In the second action, the financing company has agreed to settle but the FTCs litigation continues against the student debt relief defendants. 

Working with our law enforcement partners across the country, we have brought dozens of cases against debt relief scams like these, said XXXX XXXX, Director of the FTCs Bureau of Consumer Protection. The difference here is that a state-licensed finance company was knowingly participating in the scheme by financing the thousands of dollars in illegal fees that these scammers tricked consumers into paying. This is yet another example of how we are holding accountable companies that facilitate fraud by others. 

According to the FTCs complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX deceptively promoted payment reduction programs to consumers looking for help with their student loans. XXXX charged consumers up to {$1400.00} and funneled them into financing this fee through a high-interest loan with third-party financier XXXX XXXX XXXX, another defendant in the scheme. The State of Minnesota is a co-plaintiff in the action against XXXX. 

In its complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, the FTC alleges that a different set of defendants engaged in deceptive and abusive practices for several years that were similar to those alleged against XXXX, charging consumers up to {$1400.00} and also enrolling their customers in EACs financing program. 

The FTC alleges that the defendants in both cases violated the FTC Act and provisions of the Telemarketing Sales Rule ( TSR ). XXXX is charged in both cases with violating the assisting and facilitating provision of the TSR by providing substantial assistance to XXXX and Student Advocates when it knew, or consciously avoided knowing, that the defendants were engaged in deceptive and abusive telemarketing practices. XXXX is also charged in both cases with violating the Truth in Lending Act by failing to clearly and conspicuously disclose in writing necessary information concerning the closed-end credit that it offered. 

The stipulated order with MBV and its owners bans these defendants from selling any kind of debt relief products or services, making unsubstantiated claims about financial products and services, and also from making material misrepresentations about any other kind of product or service. It also imposes a {$4.00} XXXX payments have gone towards a Department of Education repayment program or towards their student loans. Under the stipulated orders against XXXX in both the XXXX matter and the Student Advocates matter, XXXX is required to pay nearly {$28.00} XXXX, all but {$1.00} XXXX of which is suspended based on inability to pay. XXXX is also required to relinquish its right to collect on any outstanding balances from current or former customers of XXXX and XXXX Advocates. XXXX must also notify these customers that it will not collect further payments from them. 

In the XXXX matter, the defendants are XXXX XXXX XXXX ( also doing business as XXXX XXXX XXXX Department ) ; XXXX XXXX XXXX ; and individuals XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. 

In the Student Advocates matter, the defendants are Student Advocates Team, XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX ; and individuals XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. 

How to Avoid Student Loan Debt Relief Scams To help consumers avoid falling victim to such fraud, the FTC has consumer education related to student loan debt relief scams at ftc.gov/StudentLoans. 

Only scammers promise fast loan forgiveness, and they often pretend to be affiliated with the government. Consumers should never pay an upfront fee for help, and should not share their XXXX ID with anyone. 

Consumers can apply for loan deferments, forbearance, repayment, and forgiveness or discharge programs directly through the U.S. Department of Education or their loan servicer at no cost. These programs do not require the assistance of a third-party company or payment of application fees. For federal student loan repayment options, visit XXXX. For private student loans, contact the loan servicer directly.