Consumer complaint received 2020-01-16
Product: Student loan — Private student loan
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Trouble with how payments are being handled
Company: TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS INC (NY)

I co-signed for only two ( 2 ) student loans for my friend XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX sent us two ( 2 ) letters on XX/XX/XXXX confirming that on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX had received final payments for both loans ( loan # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and loan # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX by their attorneys XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX sued me in XX/XX/XXXX and obtained a default judgment against me for an unpaid student loan. The process server swore to an untruthful Affidavit of Service. There was no one named " XXXX '' or anyone fitting the description provided by the process server ever living at my home. 
I took out an Order to Show Cause to vacate the default judgment based on improper service and also based on the meritorious defense that the loans were already paid. To my surprise XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is opposing my motion to vacate the default judgment by declaring that I did not satisfy the loans. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is putting the burden on me to prove that the two ( 2 ) Navient loans paid off in XX/XX/XXXX are the same loan ( s ) that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX obtained the default judgment for. This is a " catch XXXX '' because XXXX has not been able to provide me with the original loan applications or promissory notes for the two ( 2 ) paid loans and as a result, I can not prove that the application and promissory notes that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has submitted to the Court are one and the same.

Since I only co-signed for two ( 2 ) loans for my friend XXXX XXXX XXXX there can be no other loans with both of our names on the loans. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is being so aggressive in their collection of this default judgment that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX will not even consent to vacate the judgment and allow me time to somehow gather the evidence. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX instead wishes to continue garnishing my wages rather than address and resolve this dispute on the merits. 
Especially in light of the fact that I was not served to appear in Court in XXXX as required by law, to continue garnishing and refusing to consent to vacate the default judgment shows that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has learned nothing from their past problems with CFPB. I co-signed for only two ( 2 ) student loans for my friend XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX sent us two ( 2 ) letters on XX/XX/XXXX confirming that on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX had received final payments for both loans ( loan # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and loan # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX by their attorneys XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX sued me in XX/XX/XXXX and obtained a default judgment against me for an unpaid student loan. The process server swore to an untruthful Affidavit of Service. There was no on e named " XXXX '' or anyone fitting the description provided by the process server ever living at my home. 
I took out an Order to Show Cause to vacate the default judgment based on improper service and also that the loans were paid. To my surprise XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is opposing my motion to vacate the default judgment by declaring that I did not satisfy the loans. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is putting the burden on me to prove that the two ( 2 ) Navient loans paid off in XX/XX/XXXX is the same loan that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX obtained the judgment for. This is a " catch -22 ''  because XXXX has not been able to provide me with the original loan applications or promissory notes for the two ( 2 ) paid loans and as a result, I can not prove that the application and promissory notes that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has submitted to the Court are one and the same. 
Since I only co-signed for two ( 2 ) loans for my friend XXXX XXXX XXXX there can be no other loans with both of our names on the loans. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is being so aggressive in their collection of this default judgment that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX will not even consent to vacate the judgment and allow me time to somehow gather the evidence. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX instead wishes to continue garnishing my wages rather than address and resolve this dispute on the merits. 
Especially in light of the fact that I was not served to appear in Court in XXXX as required by law, to continue garnishing and refusing to consent to vacate the default judgment shows that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has learned nothing from their past problems with CFPB. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX pushes forward with little regard for the truth or to even investigate this obvious double collection of a paid loan.