Navient ( fka XXXX XXXX ), herein referred to as " Navient '', is reporting XXXX private student loans which it currently services to the credit reporting agencies ( CRAs ) as severely delinquent between the period of XXXX and XXXX. 

Although a secondary issue and not at the heart of my complaint, Navient is not reporting the delinquencies consistently among the XXXX CRAs, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX : each CRA reflects slightly different months with late payments and/or severity, despite these being the same XXXX loans. Put plainly, not only is Navient reporting incorrect payment histories for these loans, it is also reporting them inconsistently. 

The primary concern with my complaint is that neither of these loans should ever have been reported as delinquent to the CRAs because I had submitted all the necessary paperwork to request an in-school deferment or forbearance of repayment before the earliest-reported delinquency was reported. 

Please let me emphasis this is not an issue of a retroactive deferment being granted and Navient being unwilling to change the reported payment status to the CRAs. This is an issue of Navient receiving my fully completed requests for in-school deferments, for which I was entitled, along with supporting enrollment verification, which I submitted in XXXX and then again in XXXX. Furthermore, according to the records of the XXXX XXXX XXXX, certification of my enrollment was electronically sent by them to Navient in XXXX. 

During this time, in XXXX, Navient sent me an e-mail message stating, " Congratulations, your request for deferment has been approved! '' However, this deferment was apparently never properly applied to the loans in question. If for some reason the loans were not eligible for deferment, this was never communicated to me by Navient, neither though e-mail, online statements, regular mail, or by telephone. 

When XXXX arrived and I was once again enrolled as a student, I sent new requests for in-school deferments of these loans, which were processed and applied in a timely manner. This resulted in the current " delinquent '' cycle ending. 

However, since I was enrolled during the period of XXXX/XXXX/XXXX to XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX semester ) : these loans were eligible for in-school deferment ; I submitted my request for in-school deferment ( on two occasions ) ; Navient received third-party electronic confirmation of my enrollment via the National Student Clearinghouse in XXXX ; Navient sent me an e-mail confirming that the deferment was approved ; Navient failed to apply the deferment to the loans during the period of XXXX to XXXX. 

Therefore, Navient needs to ( 1 ) admit to its error and correct the payment history with the CRAs to show the loans were not delinquent during this time period, or ( 2a ) it needs to offer an explanation as to why the loans were not eligible for deferment during the XX/XX/XXXX semester but were eligible for deferment during the XX/XX/XXXX semester, and ( 2b ) explain why, if the loans were not eligible, I received an e-mail advising me the deferment was approved, but never received any type of notification that the deferment was not going to be applied. 

On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I sent a XXXX page letter outlining ( in more detail ) the situation I described above. Along with the letter, I attached XXXX pages of documentation, including copies of my credit reports, my request for deferment, my enrollment certification, fax logs showing successful transmission of such, the e-mail Navient sent to me stating my deferment was approved, and other related documents. 

On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX, I received an electronic letter from Navient which stated, " Navient can not remove accurate information previously reported. '' It then asked for me to provide documentation of my dispute, such as copies of my credit reports, school enrollment information, etc. All of which I had sent.