July 2015

Overseas & Underserved

STUDENT LOAN SERVICING AND THE COST TO OUR MEN AND 

WOMEN IN UNIFORM

Hollister Petraeus 

Assistant Director, Office of Servicemember Affairs

&

Seth Frotman

CFPB Student Loan Ombudsman (Acting)
2 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

Table of contents

1. Executive summary .............................................................................................3

2. Issues faced by military borrowers.....................................................................5

2.1 Rights, protections, and programs afforded by military service .............6

2.2 Customer service complications............................................................. 13

3. Conclusion ..........................................................................................................18

4. Contact information............................................................................................20
3 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

1. Executive summary 

Since March 2012, the Bureau has received student loan servicing complaints from 

servicemembers, veterans and their families that identify a unique set of obstacles they face 

when attempting to assert protections afforded to them because of their military service. In 

October 2012, the Bureau published a report documenting complaints from military borrowers 

concerning student loan servicing problems and difficulties obtaining the interest rate reduction 

guaranteed under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA). The Bureau also shared these 

complaints with other federal regulators, including the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and 

the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). In May 2014, the DOJ joined with the FDIC 

and entered an order providing $60 million in compensation1for more than 77,000 

servicemembers2in an action against student loan servicers Sallie Mae and Navient (formerly 

one company) related to their application of benefits under the SCRA to active duty members of 

the military. 

 

1

In addition to the DOJ settlement with Sallie Mae/Navient, the FDIC found violations of a federal law prohibiting 

unfair and deceptive practices with regard to student loan borrowers through the servicer’s following actions: 

inadequately disclosing its payment allocation methodologies to borrowers while allocating borrowers' 

underpayments across multiple loans in a manner that maximizes late fees; and misrepresenting and inadequately 

disclosing in its billing statements how borrowers could avoid late fees. See U.S. Department of Justice, Justice 

Department Reaches $60 million settlement with Sallie Mae (May 2015), available at 

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-reaches-60-million-settlement-sallie-mae-resolve-allegationscharging; See also Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, FDIC Announces Settlement with Sallie Mae for Unfair 

and Deceptive Practices and Violations of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (May 2014), available at 

https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2014/pr14033.html.

2

In May 2014, the Department of Justice estimated that 60,000 servicemembers were harmed by illegal activity 

covered in this settlement. Earlier this year, the Department of Justice announced that the number of military 

borrowers receiving compensation under this settlement had increased by 30%, to nearly 78,000 borrowers. See

U.S. Department of Justice, Nearly 78,000 Service Members to Begin Receiving $60 Million Under Department of 

Justice Settlement with Navient for Overcharging on Student Loans (May 28, 2015), available at 

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/nearly-78000-service-members-begin-receiving-60-million-under-departmentjustice-settlement.
4 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

Through our monitoring of complaints, the Bureau has continued to hear that inadequate 

student loan servicing causes substantial hardship for military families. Since we published our 

last report in October 2012, the Bureau has received more than 1,300 complaints from military 

borrowers related to the servicing or collection of student loans. Commonly reported servicing 

problems for servicemembers include:

 Military deferments are denied without adequate explanation, applied in a haphazard 

way, and, in some cases, are approved verbally but never applied to military borrowers’ 

accounts, resulting in late fees, defaults and debt collection.

 Application of SCRA protections continues to be an unnecessary struggle for 

servicemembers. Servicers still do not appear to understand the elements of the SCRA. 

 Military families struggle with disability discharge, including potential negative credit 

reporting consequences. They also are unsure whether the benefit is available for private 

student loans as well as for federal student loans. The uncertainty extends to co-signers 

looking for the same protections after the disability or death of a primary borrower.

 In addition to the loss of protections specific to military borrowers, complaints also 

demonstrate how servicing breakdowns can impact financial and military readiness.
5 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

2. Issues faced by military 

borrowers

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

To identify the range of issues faced by student loan borrowers, the report relies primarily on 

complaints handled by the CFPB. The CFPB has handled more than 1,300 complaints from 

military borrowers related to the servicing or collection of student loans since the publication of 

the last report on this topic in October 2012. 

We reviewed other information, such as comments submitted by the public in response to 

requests for information, submissions to the “Tell Your Story” feature on the CFPB’s website, 

and input from discussions with consumers, regulators and law enforcement agencies, and 

market participants.3 

LIMITATIONS

Readers should note that this report does not suggest the prevalence of the issues described as 

they relate to the entire student loan market. The information provided by consumers helps to 

illustrate where there is a mismatch between borrower expectations and actual service delivered.

Representatives from industry and from organizations serving members of the military, veterans 

and their families will likely find the inventory of borrower issues helpful in further 

understanding the diversity of customer experience in the market.

 

3 See, for example, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Request for Information Regarding an Initiative to 

Promote Student Loan Affordability, 78 Fed. Reg. 13327, Docket ID CFPB-2013-0004, (February 27, 2013).
6 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

2.1 Rights, protections, and programs 

afforded by military service

Servicemembers continue to face setbacks when they seek to exercise military protections

earned through their service. Military deferment, discharge due to disability, and SCRA interest 

rate reductions were created with the intention of alleviating some of the student loan burdens

faced by servicemembers. The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act provides for interest rate 

reductions on most pre-service loans, including student loans. Unfortunately, complaints that 

servicemembers have submitted to the Bureau suggest that the burdens persist. In particular, 

servicemember complaints suggest that there is an ongoing problem as to how student loan 

servicers communicate about these programs; it also appears that there are many obstacles put 

in place by servicers that servicemembers must surmount before they can fully take advantage of 

a program’s benefits.

2.1.1 Servicemembers seeking military deferments report 

running into roadblocks

Military deferment is an option afforded to some active duty servicemembers that allows for 

postponement of monthly student loan payments under certain circumstances.4 As we have 

noted in a previous report, military deferment may not be appropriate for many borrowers who 

are also eligible for income-driven payment plans and Public Service Loan Forgiveness. For 

example, servicemembers pursuing extended military careers and those interested in pursuing 

public service following their transition to civilian life may be better served by enrolling in an 

income-driven payment plan.

5

In some circumstances, certain borrowers seeking short-term flexibility may benefit from 

military deferment, particularly if their federal student loans are subsidized (subsidized loans 

are effectively interest-free during periods of military deferment). Although there may be 

 

4 In our 2012 report, The Next Front, we detailed the potential costs associated with military deferments. For both 

unsubsidized federal and private loans, interest will continue to accrue on the outstanding debt while monthly 

payments are postponed. Generally, unpaid interest is capitalized (added to the outstanding principal balance) once 

a borrower begins to repay his or her loan. See Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, The Next Front (October 

2012), available at http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201210_cfpb_servicemember-student-loan-servicing.pdf.

5 For a further discussion of the trade-offs between various military-specific student loan benefits, See, The Next 

Front, supra.
7 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

financial repercussions servicemembers should consider before exercising this short-term 

option, when they do choose to enroll in a military deferment, military borrowers should be able 

to expect the process will be clear and free from surprises. We continue to receive complaints 

from military borrowers describing a range of breakdowns and roadblocks related to this 

benefit.

Insufficient communication on military deferment undermines attempts to 

successfully repay loans. For federal student loans, a servicer is required by law to provide a 

military deferment in specific circumstances.

6 For private student loans, no such military 

deferment is mandated; however, some servicers may provide for these deferments or 

forbearances as established under the terms set forth in their promissory notes or under 

arrangements created to aid members of the military. For servicing representatives who may 

lack sufficient training in these programs, the varied requirements for a military deferment may 

cause confusion, resulting in incorrect or unresponsive answers for military borrowers.7 Poor 

communication and improper processing by student loan servicers may also lead to surprise 

delinquencies, defaults and collection attempts upon the completion of military service or the 

return from a deployment.

Failure to provide necessary information or process paperwork prior to 

deployment can cause unnecessary stress. We frequently hear from servicemembers who 

believe they had successfully enrolled in a military deferment prior to leaving for active duty

service or deployment. But they return to discover that their servicer never deferred their loans,

and in some cases, placed their loans in default, and sent their accounts to collections. 

We have also heard from several servicemembers who state that their servicers: were slow to 

process required deferment forms; lost necessary paperwork; or failed to provide basic 

information about application requirements in sufficient time for servicemembers to enroll 

prior to leaving for active duty or a deployment. For servicemembers who are making 

 

6 34 CFR 674.34(h) states that when the servicemember is called to active duty military service during a war, military 

operation, or national emergency, a servicemember has a legal entitlement to a military deferment. If the 

servicemember is already on active duty in connection with such emergency, to be eligible for military deferment 

she must be then assigned to a duty station at a location other than the location at which the member is normally 

assigned. 

7 The current statutory definition of military service necessary to qualify for a deferment may cause confusion for both 

borrowers and market participants. Criteria for the eligibility rely on active duty statuses that do not correspond 

with traditional Department of Defense distinctions.
8 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

arrangements and financial decisions before they leave their homes and families, poor 

processing related to military deferments can cause significant financial and emotional 

hardships.

We also received similar complaints from military family members who have the legal authority 

to act on behalf of a servicemember. Soon after the deployment of a servicemember, these family 

members report that they begin to receive past due notices and collection calls because the 

servicemember has not actually been enrolled in a deferment, despite previous verbal 

assurances to the contrary by their servicer.

Denial of military deferment may lack clear explanation and may be inaccurate. We 

continue to hear from servicemembers who report that loan servicers fail to explain the 

qualification requirements for deferment in sufficient detail and do not provide a rationale as to 

why a request for a deferment was denied. For example, we heard from an active duty

servicemember who had been deployed to Afghanistan and contacted his servicer to inquire 

about a military deferment during his deployment. The request was denied. But instead of 

clearly explaining the reason for the denial, the borrower’s servicer merely listed the various 

criteria used to determine eligibility, without indicating which of the criteria he failed to satisfy.

After he submitted a complaint to the CFPB, his servicer re-reviewed his previously submitted 

application and determined that he did, in fact, qualify for the deferment.

Application criteria, policies and procedures for military deferment differ between 

student loan servicers and between loan types, producing additional obstacles.

Many consumers, including military borrowers, have multiple types of student loans serviced by

two or more student loan servicers. We heard from many servicemembers with loans serviced by 

multiple companies. These borrowers note that when they applied for military deferment with 

each company, some of their loans were approved for this benefit and others denied. In some 

cases, this may be due to variation in policies and procedures between companies. In other 

cases, servicemembers’ success or failure may be determined by servicers’ differing 

interpretations of statutory requirements. These inconsistencies create confusion. For example, 

we heard from one servicemember with federal student loans serviced by two different 

companies – one of which approved her request, while the other servicer denied it. In this case, 

the military borrower discovered that her student loan servicers each interpreted her

entitlement to this benefit differently, which resulted in contradictory and confusing outcomes.

Many servicemembers have both private and federal loans serviced by a single company. In 

these cases, military borrowers may find that a requested deferment is applied to one loan type, 
9 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

but not the other. In cases where divergent outcomes may result from differences between loan 

types, customer service personnel may contribute to servicemembers’ confusion by failing to 

clearly disclose eligibility criteria or mishandling applications for these benefits. For example, 

one servicemember explained that of his three student loans, his servicer applied a military 

deferment to two, but not to the third. His complaint and his servicer’s response reveal the 

depth and breadth of confusion a servicemember may encounter when trying to learn when, and 

if, they qualify for a deferment. Subsequent to submitting his complaint, the servicer reaffirmed 

its denial of his deferment request. But then, a short time later and without explanation, the 

servicer informed him that the deferment had finally been granted. The servicemember wrote to 

let us know he still does not understand what made his servicer change its mind.

For all military borrowers, including those with multiple loans serviced by a single company or

by several companies, clear and accurate communication related to eligibility criteria, as well as 

the adequate processing of requests, is critical to ensure that these borrowers can continue to 

manage their student loan debt while serving their country.

2.1.2 Loan discharge policies may create hurdles, deadends for service-disabled veterans and military 

families

Under federal law, veterans with a service-connected disability can seek federal student loan 

discharge (forgiveness) if they received a 100-percent disability rating from the Department of 

Veterans Affairs (VA).8 Federal law also requires that federal student loans be discharged upon 

the death of a borrower.9 In contrast, private student lenders are not required by law to offer

military borrowers a disability discharge, nor are they required to discharge co-signed loans 

upon the death of a servicemember. Some companies do grant loan forgiveness on a case-bycase basis and, in some cases, this may be required under the terms of private student loan 

contracts.

10

 

8 Federal Student Aid Total and Permanent Discharge 101, available at http://www.disabilitydischarge.com/TPD-101/.

William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) Program loan, Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program 

loan, and/or Federal Perkins Loan (Perkins Loan) Program. 34 CFR 674.61, 682.402, 685.213.

9 34 CFR 682.402(b). 34 CFR 674.61, 34 CFR 685.212.

10 The CFPB receives many complaints from disabled veterans struggling to discharge their private student loans. 

Unlike their federal counterparts, private student lenders are not required to discharge a loan even upon a showing 
10 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

Federal student loan discharge due to Total or Permanent Disability (TPD) is also available to 

non-veteran borrowers who can demonstrate disability; however, for men and women who are 

unable to work due to a service-connected disability, the process is expedited and certain 

documentation requirements are waived.11

Military borrowers have submitted complaints documenting problems related to the processing 

of paperwork required to obtain these benefits, breakdowns related to the furnishing of credit 

information after obtaining loan discharge and dead-ends for parents managing co-signed loans 

made to servicemembers killed in action.

Parents who co-sign on loans made to servicemembers killed in action may be left 

on the hook and out of options. Co-signers note that information about discharge or 

alternative arrangements in the case of death of the primary borrower is not readily available and 

that decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, giving co-signers little understanding of how the 

process works or if they will be successful. When servicemembers are killed in combat, military 

families face similar hurdles. We heard from military families who requested student loans to be 

forgiven following the death of their child. Borrowers noted that the process of requesting loan 

forgiveness was not transparent, varied depending on their servicer or the owner of their loan 

and, when loan forgiveness was denied, that the criteria used for this decision was never 

disclosed.12 For families mourning the loss of a child killed in combat, these detours and deadends can prolong an already painful process. 

Servicers’ furnishing practices related to disability discharge may damage 

veterans’ credit. When disability discharge is properly awarded, veterans and their spouses 

report that servicers furnish credit information that does not reflect the discharge accurately. 

The Bureau has heard from disabled veterans struggling with credit reporting problems. We 

previously recounted the experience of one service-disabled veteran who went from a nearly 

 

of total and permanent disability. The Bureau has received numerous complaints requesting this discharge by 

borrowers incapacitated and unable to work, and has previously highlighted this issue. Hollister K. Petraeus,

Testimony Before the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs (July 3, 2013).

11 Department of Education Dear Colleague Letter, July 2013, available at 

http://ifap.ed.gov/eannouncements/051713TPDInfoChgestoTPDDischargeRegsJuly2013.html.

12 As we have noted in the past, borrowers with loans packaged as securities and sold to investors may face additional 

barriers when seeking asstance from student loan servicers as a function of the structure of student loan 

securitizations. For a detailed discussion of these issues, see ̧Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Mid-Year 

Update on Student Loan Complaints (2015), available at www.consumerfinance.gov/reports/2015-mid-yearupdate-on-student-loan-complaints/.
11 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

perfect “super prime” credit score to a much lower score simply because he received total and 

permanent disability discharge on a federal student loan.13 In this case, instead of reporting that 

the borrower no longer owed the debt, his servicer told the credit bureaus that his loan had been 

“assigned to government,” which is often interpreted as an indication of default. Left 

uncorrected, such errors can potentially set service-disabled veterans up for financial ruin.

Co-signers with a service-connected disability may have no recourse when they are 

unable to repay a private student loan. While some private student lenders have policies 

and procedures in place to discharge loans due to permanent disability of the primary borrower, 

these companies’ responses to veterans’ complaints indicate that the same protections may not 

be in place for permanently-disabled veteran co-signers. Co-signers generally have a 

responsibility to ensure a private student loan is repaid. Due to differing personal 

circumstances, co-signers are often faced with the reality of being the main, or even the only, 

borrower making monthly payments. We have heard from veteran co-signers who have been 

determined to be unemployable due to their service-connected disability and are still required to 

keep up large monthly payments in order to protect their credit.

2.1.3 Military borrowers continue to face detours and deadends when seeking to invoke their SCRA rights

In our October 2012 report, we concluded that servicers must ensure strong compliance 

mechanisms and customer-service standards that work for servicemembers and their families. 

Nearly three years have passed, yet servicemembers continue to report difficulties obtaining the 

SCRA interest rate cap of six percent.14 Complaints suggest servicers continue to improperly 

process these requests and do not clearly convey information about the application process and 

other requirements to military borrowers.

Poor communication and inconsistent application of SCRA protections by servicers may 

exacerbate the stress associated with major events in military life. Servicemembers and their 

families continue to report about the frustration they experience when their servicers require 

 

13 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Veterans: Take advantage of student loan forgiveness, but don’t let it 

damage your credit (November 17, 2014), available at http://www.consumerfinance.gov/blog/veterans-dont-letstudent-loan-forgiveness-damage-your-credit/.

14 50 U.S.C. App. § 527.
12 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

them to repeatedly assert their SCRA rights, even as they have other pressing concerns that 

require their attention. Servicemembers emphasize their need to be mission-focused and free of 

distractions when faced with impending deployments. 

One consumer’s complaint highlights the stress he experienced when he tried to invoke his 

SCRA protections. His circumstances are not unique; instead, it captures the experience 

common to many of the servicemembers submitting complaints to the Bureau. This military 

borrower’s story began in summer 2014, when he submitted his first complaint two weeks 

before he was scheduled to deploy. In that complaint, the consumer described his frustration

and stress:

His servicer responded to his complaint the day before he was scheduled to deploy. In its 

response, the servicer assured him that it applied the SCRA protection and it would continue to 

monitor the Department of Defense’s Manpower Database (DMDC) to verify his continued 

eligibility. Unfortunately, it appears the servicer failed to do so. In winter 2015, while deployed

and without further explanation from his servicer, he discovered his interest rate had increased 

above the six percent cap. The servicemember submitted another complaint. In his second 

complaint, he stated he provided his servicer with a copy of his orders that had an end date of 

October 2016.

I have contacted the company trying to get them to apply the mandate of the 

Servicemember Civil Relief Act. My last communication with them was three days ago 

during which I was told I'd be receiving a document via email. As of this complaint I have 

yet to receive it. I fear [their] delay tactic[s] will continue past the time I have stateside... I 

am on orders to deploy to [location]...this month. I need help. I can't continue to fight this 

when my attention should be on matters that will literally involve life or death decisions.
13 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

In its response to the consumer, his servicer stated his submitted orders were not valid, but 

provided no explanation. More importantly, after submitting the orders and while preparing for 

deployment, the servicemember was never told that his servicer deemed his orders 

unacceptable. Though the servicer eventually applied the interest rate cap, it took seven months 

of stress and filing complaints to have SCRA protections properly applied.

We also hear from military families that obtaining the SCRA interest rate cap is difficult when 

they act on behalf of a servicemember. For example, we heard from spouses who described 

difficulty communicating with student loan servicers. These spouses report that some servicers 

would not directly communicate with them, nor would they provide an explanation of benefits, 

despite authorization or power of attorney permitting them to access this information.

Military deferment, discharge due to disability, and SCRA interest rate reductions are vitally 

important to the financial health of servicemembers and their families. Servicers must make the 

requirements, application process and communication regarding these programs clear, concise

and free of unnecessary roadblocks.

2.2 Customer service complications

Servicemembers are often faced with personal and financial circumstances unique to military 

life. For instance, when deployed, servicemembers may lack access to traditional 

communication methods or even the ability to communicate at all for extended periods of time. 

When servicers fail to communicate accurately and provide answers to borrower inquiries in a 

timely manner, it may distract military borrowers from their missions, forcing them to navigate 

through red tape and overcome processing obstacles during their active duty service. 

The issue I have, which I have also addressed with the Consumer Financial Protection 

Bureau in the past, involved my loan servicing company at the time, arbitrarily increasing 

my interest rates above the limit of 6%. After my initial complaint they re-adjusted it to

comply with the mandate of the SCRA. A few months later they increased it again, this 

time claiming that I was no longer Active Duty and thus did not meet the requirement for 

it. I took time out of my schedule; time which could have been better spent preparing for 

my upcoming deployment and sent them all the documents they required. Instead, I am 

now here in [deployed] and I have to fight this battle yet again.
14 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

Servicemembers have also identified significant payment processing problems related to student 

loan repayment benefits for members of the military, particularly military borrowers receiving 

lump-sum payments from the Department of Defense (DoD).

15

2.2.1 Poor customer service hinders successful repayment 

Student loan borrowers continue to submit complaints related to the payment processing 

practices of student loan servicers. Many servicemembers report that their loan servicers may 

make it difficult to submit accurate payments while they are away from home, particularly when 

servicers’ payment processing and customer service policies require repeated phone calls, 

substantial paperwork or supplemental written instructions.

Recently, the Bureau and other federal regulators have found that certain payment processing 

practices violate federal law.16 For servicemembers, payment processing problems are further 

complicated by the demands of military life. For example, we heard from deployed 

servicemembers who were having difficulty obtaining basic account information or making 

timely payments because of limited access to their online servicing platform. Depending on the 

location of a military borrowers’ deployment, finding an opportunity to transact with the 

servicer in real-time can be difficult. Even when servicemembers do find an opportunity to 

contact their servicer, customer service breakdowns can make this process particularly 

challenging. As is the case for many consumers with student loans, servicemembers reported 

that customer service lines were staffed with representatives who they perceived as 

unprofessional, unable to reference prior customer interactions, or provided conflicting 

information about how to get out of default. Unfortunately for military borrowers, their

available time to address processing problems is limited and poor communication practices are 

particularly difficult to overcome under these circumstances.

 

15 10 U.S.C. 2171(a)(1), (b), (c). The Department of Defense publishes an application form that provides additional 

information to servicemembers related to this benefit, which is administered separately by each branch of the 

armed forces. See U.S. Department of Defense, DOD Educational Loan Repayment Program (LRP) Annual 

Application (January 2014), available at http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/forms/eforms/dd2475.pdf.

16 See FDIC Settlement with Sallie Mae for Unfair and Deceptive Practices and Violations of the SCRA, available at 

https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2014/pr14033.html; see also, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,

Supervisory Highlights: Fall 2014 (2014), available at http://www.consumerfinance.gov/reports/supervisoryhighlights-fall-2014.
15 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

2.2.2 Servicers’ policies may limit the benefits of the DoD 

Student Loan Repayment Program

Servicers may be mismanaging benefits awarded under the Department of Defense Student 

Loan Repayment Program (SLRP), causing confusion and applying payments in ways that 

increase costs for military borrowers. Members of the military may qualify for and use SLRP,

which provides a cash benefit to servicemembers with student loans. This benefit is paid directly 

to student loan servicers, frequently in the form of annual lump sum payments made by the

(DoD).17 Servicemembers report a variety of problems they experience when attempting to use 

this program, including: processing problems when directing funds to specific high-rate loans in 

military borrowers’ accounts; inconsistent information regarding whether payments may be 

applied to private as well as federal loans; communication breakdowns regarding whether 

payments made are applied to principal or interest; and confusion among servicing personnel 

about whether a deferment or forbearance should be in place during periods covered by an 

SLRP payment. 

Military borrowers expect sufficient service when using this award, which for many is a critical 

part of their compensation for their service to our country. These borrowers should not have to 

deal with payment processing issues when they inform their student loan servicer of the 

potential for payment from the D0D. Unfortunately, complaints suggest that servicers may fail 

to provide consumers with sufficient guidance as to how this benefit is processed. 

Servicemembers often do not appear to receive adequate information from their loan servicers 

to successfully use the SLRP program.

Poor communication by servicing personnel related to how SLRP payments are 

processed leads to missed payments, late fees and debt collection for military 

borrowers. Servicemembers are often not given information about the status of their SLRP 

payment, which leaves them unsure as to whether or not they should be making additional 

monthly payments while the lump sum is being processed. Servicemembers told us that they 

notify their servicer of anticipated SLRP payments from the DoD. Too often, servicemembers 

receive no communication from their servicer while they await payments from the DoD. If the 

servicer allows the account to be placed in forbearance or deferment while the DoD is processing 

the SLRP payment, the servicer should give the servicemember clear instructions for enrollment 

 

17 10 U.S. Code § 2171.
16 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

before it’s too late. Unfortunately, servicers often fail to provide sufficient guidance to 

servicemembers who await SLRP payments. One servicemember reported that instead of 

ensuring his account was properly set up in a deferment or forbearance, his servicer made 

threatening and harassing phone calls demanding payment. By communicating clear guidance 

to servicemembers about their payment processing options, loan servicers can avoid causing 

military borrowers additional stress and unnecessary confusion.

Military borrowers report problems receiving clear answers even after their 

servicer accepts payment from the DoD. Sometimes the problem continues beyond the 

servicer’s receipt of the lump-sum payment. Some servicemembers report that they were 

required to continue to make monthly payments after their DoD payment was applied. One 

servicemember specified that his servicer required monthly payments even after a lump-sum 

payment covered the total amount due over a period of months, instead of sharing information 

about a military deferment that could suspend his obligation to make payments over this 

period.

18 According to one military borrower:

2.2.3 Problems related to servicing transfers impact 

servicemembers’ protections

While on active duty, servicemembers report that if their loans are transferred to a new student 

loan servicer, it can result in a variety of processing problems that pose unique risks for 

members of the military. Servicing transfers often create confusion for any student loan 

borrower. But for members of the military, servicing transfers not only create confusion, they 

also may hamper a servicemember’s ability to receive and retain protections like military 

deferment and the interest rate cap guaranteed under the SCRA. Deployed servicemembers may 

be out of reach when a transfer occurs and, therefore, unavailable to proactively monitor their 

 

18 See 20 U.S.C. § 1087e (l) (2).

I have $20,000 in student loan repayment through the military, but they only pay once a 

year. [Company name] has been nothing but rude and unhelpful ever since. They will not 

work with me on working out a payment process to work with the once a year payment by 

the Student Loan Repayment Program. I am beyond frustrated.
17 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

student loan servicer to ensure their military protections are maintained during a servicing 

transfer.

Servicing transfers may lead to disruption or discontinuation of military benefits, 

lost payments and red tape for military borrowers. Following a servicing transfer, some 

servicemembers may discover that their military protections, such as military deferment, are no 

longer applied to their account, causing their account to be treated as past-due. We heard from 

servicemembers who successfully enrolled in military deferments; however, after their loans 

were transferred to new servicers, these servicemembers’ accounts lost their military deferment 

status. Some of these servicemembers did not discover the loss of their military deferment until 

their accounts went into default. We also heard from servicemembers who have had to spend 

their time while deployed talking to servicers to work out these loan transfer snafus. For 

example, we heard from a servicemember who had been handed off to several different servicer 

representatives who each described different repayment standards and requirements.
18 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

3. Conclusion

In the nearly three years since the Bureau released its first report documenting student loan 

complaints from military borrowers, we continued listening to servicemembers, veterans and 

their families as they shared their experiences with student loan servicers. Servicemembers 

continued to tell us how they are struggling to exercise the rights, protections and programs 

afforded by their military service. They also described how general servicing issues become even 

more difficult as a result of the realities of military life. 

The Bureau has repeatedly noted that many of the most common breakdowns in student loan 

servicing bear a strong resemblance to the widespread failures in the mortgage servicing market 

prior to, during and in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis. Many military families 

were victims of predatory mortgage lending and illegal foreclosures throughout this period. 

Many of the same characteristics that make military families especially vulnerable to predatory 

practices by bad actors in the mortgage market also create increased risks when they struggle to 

manage their student loan debt. 

Many of the issues detailed above resulted in negative credit reporting. The armed forces 

consider credit history when evaluating servicemembers’ ability to maintain the security 

clearances required for active duty. Diligently protecting and maintaining one’s credit history is 

a necessity for any consumer. For our overseas military population, their missions often leave 

them without the luxury to vigorously monitor their credit and make endless calls to resolve 

errors based on servicing failures. Servicemembers should not have to find themselves 

distracted from their military assignments by a mishandled payment, an unanswered deferment 

request, or a botched transfer. Their time should be spent focusing on their mission, with their 

limited precious free time spent communicating with their families and loved ones, not fixing 

servicer errors or worrying about the additional repercussions of potential negative credit 

reporting.
19 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

Because of the added pressure for positive credit history due to military employment, the need 

for servicers to adequately communicate and apply military program options – as well as to 

deliver adequate service to military borrowers in general– is vitally important.

In contrast to the robust federal protections in place for borrowers with mortgages, there is 

currently no comprehensive statutory or regulatory framework that provides uniform standards 

for the servicing of all student loans. As the Bureau continues to receive input from consumers, 

market participants and other stakeholders on ways to improve the quality of student loan 

servicing for all consumers, we remain particularly attuned to the serious and significant 

problems facing servicemembers repaying student debt. Ultimately, servicing failures lead to 

greater risks for servicemembers and hurt our men and women in uniform. 
20 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

4. Contact Information

To reach the CFPB’s Office of Servicemember Affairs or Student Loan 

Ombudsman:

By email

military@cfpb.gov

students@cfpb.gov

By mail

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

1700 G Street NW

Washington, DC 20552

To submit a complaint:

Online

consumerfinance.gov/complaint

By phone

Toll-Free: (855) 411-CFPB (2372)

Español : (855) 411-CFPB (2372) 

TTY/TDD: (855) 729-CFPB (2372)

By fax

(855) 237-2392

By mail

US Mail: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

PO Box 4503

Iowa City, Iowa 52244

Press and media requests

By email
21 CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU

press@consumerfinance.gov