Consumer complaint received 2020-05-19
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Received bad information about your loan
Company: Nelnet, Inc. (WI)

In XXXX of XXXX, I started an Income Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan with Nelnet, because I just could not afford my standard loan payments at that time ( {$280.00} ). I was working two part-time  jobs, fresh out of college, with a toddler and another baby on the way. Applying for the IDR qualified me for monthly payments of {$0.00} for the first year of that plan. During that year my financial situation improved as I was hired full-time by the XXXX XXXX XXXX of Wisconsin. While I had several reasons for choosing a fulfilling career in state service, one of them was Public Service Loan Forgiveness ( PSLF ). 

When I was due for XXXX IDR recertification with Nelnet I started sending in documentation in late XX/XX/XXXX. Since I had recently been hired on full-time ( mid XX/XX/XXXX ) I also inquired about PSLF with customer service representatives ( CSRN ) at Nelnet and went through what I believed was the PSLF application process from XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. I recall being reassured by multiple CSRNs that my new recertified payments would qualify toward the PSLF program as long as I submitted the PSLF certification documentation of my state service after about a year of making payments, and nothing else needed to be submitted regarding PSLF at that time. Therefore, I continued to make 10 payments of {$110.00} to Nelnet ( payment history attached ) that I was led to believe would retroactively be approved for PSLF later. 

When I was due for XXXX IDR recertification I started sending in documentation in late XX/XX/XXXX ( notification attached ). I also submitted a completed PSLF Certification document ( confirmed in attachment ). In XX/XX/XXXX my loan was unexpectedly transferred to another servicer ( notification attached ), XXXX, and I was given a new monthly payment ( {$39.00} ) for an IDR, which I continued to pay monthly under the impression that these payments were also qualifying for PSLF ( which they are, fortunately ). 

In XX/XX/XXXX, I received a PSLF Qualifying Payment Update ( QPU ) document ( attached ) from XXXX that stated my loan payments between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX did not qualify for PSLF ( contrary to what I was led to believe by Nelnet ). When I inquired about why, a CSR at XXXX ( XXXX ) told me that the four non-payment or $ 0 months ( XXXX XXXX ) payments did not qualify ( which Nelnet originally made clear ), but the other ten payments of {$110.00} should qualify for PSLF, and there was most likely an error made by the automated system when my loan was transferred from Nelnet. This XXXX led me to believe that this happens frequently and it gets rectified quite easily with human intervention. Also, she acknowledged that an early payment made in XXXX, should be evident in the review that it was intended for XXXX. Therefore, she marked my case for review ( in XX/XX/XXXX ). I followed up with XXXX a couple months later, and was told the case was still under review, and the XXXX had no idea how long it would take. 

Over the ensuing months to more recently this situation got deprioritized, as I was going through family hardship, separation/reconciliation, and a global pandemic broke out. On XX/XX/XXXX I was sent a letter ( attached ) by XXXX notifying me that my annual IDR recertification was coming soon and " In about 2 months, [ I should ] look for another communication from us with easy instructions and a direct link to recertify online. '' So I waited about 2 months before starting the recertification process ( as I've come to understand the XXXX system gets finicky if you do something too early ). So I set a reminder for mid XXXX. 

So today, I called XXXX to inquire about my PSLF status, and it was revealed that on XX/XX/XXXX I was sent an email ( that I mistakenly deleted, because that super important email showed as junk mail, I'm still not sure why that happens, but luckily recovered and attached ... I digress ) that included a link to a response regarding the PSLF review ( which is currently not accessible ). No letter was sent to my inbox on my XXXX account or my home ( since I'm signed up for paperless correspondence ), so I currently have no documentation regarding my PSLF review that took 10 months. The XXXX explained that, my 10 payments are not eligible for PSLF, because they payments were not " fully satisfied, '' and that one payment was made too early. I was basically told it was Nelnet 's responsibility to give me the correct information and transfer my loan appropriately originally. 

So I called Nelnet stating my grievances, and was told a contradictory story from what my understanding from them was from multiple CSRN exchanges over the better part of a year. They told me I was supposed to have submitted PSLF Application up front back in XX/XX/XXXX ( news to me ) and that my loan would have been transferred right then. Further, they take no responsibility for the misunderstanding, and I should take up my complaint with XXXX. 

My official complaints I would like Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to investigate are the following : I feel Nelnet 's representatives consistently misled me and/or failed to notice/determine that I somehow did not correctly apply for PSLF eligibility, even though I had several exchanges with them over the course of a year, costing me an extra {$1100.00} or 10 months of payments at the end of my 10 years of Public Service ( which I expect will amount to even more money ). 

I feel XXXX 's review process takes much too long ( 10 months for me ), and their written communication regarding results or status of reviews is inadequate due to extremely limited/brief accessibility. 

I will take responsibility for my misunderstanding that a series of inquiries to and verbal assurances from Nelnet staff officially deemed my future payments eligible for PSLF. However, I feel that both XXXX and Nelnet have failed to provide fair and adequate service that has resulted in a personal financial loss of at least {$1100.00} and a mistrust in their competence, transparency, and responsiveness.