PDF Attached under CFPB1, which would correctly show letter.
Good Day Sir or Madam : My name is XXXX XXXX out of XXXX, FL. I was an active borrower of XXXX XXXX now Navient from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXXaccount number XXXX. The total disbursed amount was {$97000.00} to XXXX XXXX  University. In Summer of XX/XX/XXXX, I received a call from the 30-day collections indicating a payment of $ 1000+ and was due immediately. To be candid, I made that in one month and after indicating so the agent advised me I was only eligible for either forbearance or education deferment but no income based repayment was available per the loan agreement. Obviously, there was no other alternative within my budget. I exhausted forbearance approximately 2 years later and once again I was advised educational deferment was the only option or I would be immediately due {$1400.00} payment once again an amount that comprised of my entire income. I exhausted education deferment in XX/XX/XXXX where at this point the balance/payment had doubled. Navient essentially provided options that would not resolve the issue of the size of the payment but further postponed the payment. Ironically this systematically increases the balance which further worsens the original problem of unaffordability.
My current payment is {$2100.00} and unfortunately, I am not Lawyer or Doctor but an XXXX XXXX XXXX ( non-manager role ) for a XXXX XXXX. I certainly can not afford this payment now and would be extremely unlikely to for consecutively 175 months in my life time while still achieving support to my dependents, lifes necessities such as home, automobiles, and retirement. I do not want it to appear that I am irresponsible financially as I have never missed a payment with any of my obligations nor do I have negative marks within my credit. I have Smart Option loan currently through Navient that has been debited consecutively for 90 months through my checking account. I am responsible consumer seeking a realistic reasonable expectation of payment for the balance incurred Navient has failed in realistically resolving this matter and after contacting them prior delinquency it was quite clear Navient has little to no interest in recovering balance owed but extending them for as long as possible which essentially increases the total cost of the loan. Their payment options solely rely on the ignorance of borrowers by quelling immediate concerns about repayment/credit score to further bury the consumer into a debt they will be unlikely escape. I simply describe this behavior as predatory and the details below will quantify this accusation.
The original disbursed amount was {$97000.00}. The loan would have costed me {$170000.00} over 175 months. This is assuming that I could have liquid cash of {$1100.00} for 175 months. A quick analysis of median household income of income in XX/XX/XXXXfor the state of Florida was {$53000.00} and has declined to {$49000.00}. Why would XXXX XXXX ( now Navient ) solicit loans in values up to {$100000.00} to individuals who cant even be approved for wireless service, a credit card, auto loan, and mortgage. This obviously preys on young adults who have little to no credit history and lack the financial literacy/experience necessary to understand the obligations of these types of financial instruments. Couple this with a school that graduates less than 50 % of its full time first time college students ; towards non-skill based degrees. These loans were destined to fail. XXXX XXXX/Navient had nothing to lose as the debt is non-dischargeable in bankruptcy. My balance onXX/XX/XXXXwas {$200000.00} and at its current path this loan would cost me {$380000.00} if I could afford {$2100.00} consecutively for 175 months. Its appalling to think that Navient would assume full repayment would occur without issue.
As the borrower, I fully understand it is my duty to communicate financial issues that directly correlate to the ability to repay. Below you will find actions taken by me and notes regarding the conversation. I will then analyze the offers by Navient and current balances which clearly indicate the predatory behavior by the Navient Corporation.
XX/XX/XXXX : Contacted Customer Care : Indicating that I can not afford the payment for my signature loans and the associates first suggestion was placing the account in interest only. This does not reduce principal at all. The payment is still unaffordable at $ XXXX. After indicating that I have no interest in not reducing my debt they transfered me to collections where they were surprised that I contacted prior delinquency. After providing my basic financials, the associate ( XXXX ) provides me an offer 3 % interest rate but the payment would fall around $ XXXX which was outside of my budget. It would also not provide resolution but a band aid as this matter would be covered for 15 months after it would be Navients discretion whether it would be offered once again.
XX/XX/XXXX : Contacted Collections once again and was provide the same results by associate ( XXXX ). Indicated this payment would not work for me nor would this be a long-term resolution. This agent suggested I seek loan consolidation outside Navient. Not at all likely when you have exorbitant Student Loan debt.
XX/XX/XXXX : I sent attached letter to Navient Customer Advocate in hopes of achieving realistic resolution to this matter.
XX/XX/XXXX : Received Call from XXXX XXXX Ext XXXX, indicating unable to complete deal indicated on letter but will assist in achieving reasonable payment. She inquired as to what I was seeking in payment and then indicated she would try 2 % @ XXXX per month for 15 months, I rebutted that balance has exceeded original life of loan by over {$30000.00} roughly and that an interest rate of 0 % would be suitable ; She suggested 1 % despite my financials and the current balance of the loan. She advised me that she would submit a request but to provide time to process and review ; To expect a response at the end of the week.XX/XX/XXXX : I contacted XXXX to follow up and was advised 1 % was submitted, reviewed but pending approval, She indicated responses do occur sometimes accepted at initial offer or rebutted with .5-1 % increase. She indicated I should expect a call the following week XX/XX/XXXX : Account went delinquent XX/XX/XXXX : Received Call from XXXX XXXX advising that there was not an approval but received a response indicating that achieving this repayment option should not be an issue to expect a call shortly. I inquired from who? She indicated collections.
XX/XX/XXXX: I contacted XXXX XXXX requesting clarification regarding the discussion on the XXXX and stated I had not received a call but was seeing to resolve matter promptly. She transferred me to collections and Spoke to XXXX XXXXXXXX-XXXX, indicated previous collection conversations prior to delinquency, escalation to customer advocate, expectation of achieving 1 % was feasible, and that collections would be resolving this matter. I clearly indicated that I was seeking under 800 price point of payment excluding smart option loan. I wanted to keep loan payments under $ 1k with smart option despite my financials. She indicated she understood placed me on hold for about 10 minutes. She returned and offered {$900.00} payment, 15 reoccurring @ 3 % ,352 months. The associate had ignored what I had indicated and provided me an option that was no change from XX/XX/XXXX collections offer except with the length of the agreement which lowered the payment amount. I re-contacted XXXX XXXX  indicating the collections and Customer Advocate were not on the same page to re-contact me.
XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX XXXX returned my call indicating a memo had not been left on the account but now was to expect a call or contact at my leisure. At this point it was frustrating as I felt XXXX XXXX had essentially wasted my time and thought by referring me to collections I would accept the already poor arrangements that Navient offered. I had 0 % interest in chasing Navient as they made it abundantly clear that Customer Advocate was simply a name of the department and was not indicative of action that would advocate for the customer. The call on the XXXX  also led me to believe no real action was taken as there was never a confirmed approval that she had indicated would be necessary. I believe Navient sat until the account was delinquent.
XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX XXXX contacted me indicating there was no success in her organization contacting me ; Contacted collections and spoke to an associate initially tried to collect delinquent balance ; after I indicating recent efforts with customer Advocate she offered me 1 % at {$690.00} @ 356, Initially the resolution seemed reasonable and the associate then began to play the terms and conditions regarding the agreement which indicated the payment would be XXXX for 15 months with review of financials a year later, and the account would be subject to capitalizing interest. I agreed initially but posed questions about the capitalizing interest and she indicated that the 3 first months of the rate reduction program would mean capitalizing interest would occur. I inquired whether it would be at 1 % or normal interest rates she simply responded I dont know ( red flag ) I indicated Id like clarification she came back with a response from a Manager she would assume that it would be the old ( Red Flag # 2 ). Short time later the associate then disclosed that the program would not offer the same interest rate after a year review but increase, essentially a graduated repayment program, at Navients discretion ( Red Flag # 3 ). This essentially voided my interest in accepting such a program and after indicating so the associate tried to tell me its too late I had already accepted which shortly after giving her grief she reversed and did not process. This lack of knowledge and up front disclosure regarding solutions essentially compromises consumer trust to Navient and shows its intentions are not in the best interest of the consumer but to its shareholder by increasing the value of these loans by any means necessary such as forbearance, deferment, extending terms, and graduated repayment programs ( these programs simply target delinquent/defaulted accounts and turn them into paid accounts by luring them with band aid resolutions ).
After analyzing the offers by Navient any of them could essentially be at high risk to the consumer. One scenario could simply be offering this program and then after the 15 months they could force original terms and recover any balance repayment in delinquency/default ; Essentially trapping the consumer in debt. With over 1886 complaints/113 negative reviews on Better Business Bureau, and 569 complaints on Consumer Affairs essentially littered with horror stories with Navient why would I take the risk?
Diligent effort has occurred on my part to work with Navient to achieve realistic repayment of debt. I reviewed the offers made by Navient that they consider doing me a favor and quantify the statements above.
Lets Talk Numbers Option 1 ) Pay as is ( can not afford ) Balance owed to Navient on XX/XX/XXXX was {$200000.00} ( 2.1x the original disbursed balance ) If I could theoretically afford the payment there seeking at XXXX per month for 175 Months the cost of the loan would equate {$380000.00} ( 2.1x original cost of loan ) Original Balance Disbursed was {$97000.00} The original cost of the loan prior to the doubling of the balance because of capitalized interest was {$170000.00} Account accrues roughly {$1500.00} ( likely more ) interest per month Option 2 ) 3 % /175Months Interest Rate @ {$1400.00} for 15 Payments ( Can not Afford ) If I had accepted 3 % @ {$1400.00} for 15 Payments Initial Offer : I would of payed Navient a total of {$21000.00} In the first 3 months, the account would accrue capitalizing interest at normal rates : $ XXXXx3= {$4700.00} Gross Repayment ( before interest of 3 % ) would have been {$14000.00} in 15 months ( 21000 ( out of pocket ) XXXX ( missed payment ) -XXXX ( capitalized interest for 3 months ) = ) {$14000.00} Net Repayment with interest would have been {$7900.00} with out of pocket at {$21000.00} ( XXXX ( Gross Repayment ) XXXX ( interest for 12 months @ 3 % =XXXX per month ) ) Option 3 ) 1 % /XXXX Months Interest Rate @ {$690.00} for 15 Payments If I had accepted the 1 % @ {$690.00} for 15 payments ( There supposed favor ) : I would of paid Navient a total {$10000.00} Per Collections first 3 months were to cover the delinquency {$2000.00} In the first 3 months, the account would accrue capitalizing interest at normal rates : $ XXXXx3= {$4700.00} Gross Repayment ( before interest of 1 % ) would have been {$3500.00} in 15 months ( XXXX ( out of pocket ) -XXXX ( missed payment ) -XXXX ( 3months capitalizing interest ) = {$3500.00} ) Net Repayment with Interest would have been {$1500.00} with out of pocket at {$10000.00} ( XXXX ( gross repayment ) - XXXX ( Interest for 12 months @ 1 % =XXXX per month ) ) I am completely aware that term lengths also play a part in amount of principal repayment but my total out of pocket would have been {$21000.00} ( @ 3 % ) or XXXX ( @ 1 % ). Both of these options are significant portions of my income. In 15 months, my balance would of reduce by {$7900.00} @ 3 % or {$1500.00} @ 1 %. The first options mean that 37 % of my contribution of payments actually went to principal. The second option means that only 14 % of my contribution of payments actually went to principal. Collections and Customer Advocate make it sound as their doing me a favor but there placing me, the consumer, at a significant risk where I would out of pocket significantly while Navient holds complete discretion in terms of assisting the borrower and could swing the terms in their favor to control repayment or nonrepayment. Again, essentially trapping me in debt. I remind you that Navient essentially provided options that would not resolve the issue of the size of the payment but further postponed the payment which systematically increases the balance which further worsens the original problem of unaffordability. This behavior shown by Navient not only influences my Credit and future utilization of it but the financial security of my family. Which although indicated by letter sent to customer advocate showed no regard or concern but assumed ignorance with these poor offers of repayment.