Consumer complaint received 2025-01-01 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Private student loan
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Keep getting calls about your loan
Company: MOHELA
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
Subject : Formal Complaint Regarding Denial of Student Loan Misconduct Discharge Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint Team, I am writing to formally file a complaint concerning the improper handling and denial of my student loan misconduct discharge application by MOHELA, the current servicer of my loan. Despite providing substantial evidence of institutional misconduct, my application has been denied twice without clear or justifiable reasoning. 

Loan Information : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which has been the subject of multiple legal actions for fraudulent and predatory practices. The institution misled students about job placement rates, career outcomes, and the overall value of the education providedpractices that have been legally recognized. 

In XXXX, the parent company, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), reached a {$95.00} XXXX settlement with the XXXX XXXX over illegal recruiting tactics. 
Following widespread acknowledgment of these deceptive practices, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX approved over {$6.00} XXXX in student loan forgiveness for former XXXX XXXX students, including those who attended the XXXX XXXX campus between XXXX and XXXX. 

Despite these clear findings, XXXX, as the original loan servicer, denied my school misconduct discharge application without justification. I reached out to XXXX for an explanation on XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX redirected me to MOHELA. MOHELA who is now servicing my loan, appears to have adopted XXXX decision without conducting an independent or thorough review of the evidence I submitted. 

Under the FTC XXXX XXXX, I am entitled to assert defenses against loan holders when institutional misconduct occurs. Given the legal precedents set against The XXXX XXXX and XXXX role in facilitating these loans, I believe XXXX initial denial was both insufficient and improper. MOHELAs reliance on that flawed decision perpetuates this failure. 

Concerns : Primary Investigation Failure : MOHELA 's second denial raises serious concerns about the integrity of its review process. MOHELAs subsequent reliance on XXXX 's decision is inadequate. 

Lack of Transparency : Neither Navient nor MOHELA has provided specific reasons for the denials, preventing me from addressing any perceived shortcomings. 

Failure to Address Evidence : The substantial evidence I provided demonstrates institutional misconduct. The repeated denials suggest that my case has been ignored or inadequately reviewed. 

Requested Actions : Investigate MOHELA 's Role : I request that the CFPB conduct a full investigation into MOHELA 's handling of my school misconduct discharge application, including its review process and compliance with borrower protections. 

Require MOHELA to Conduct a Fair Review : Direct MOHELA to independently review my case without relying on Navients flawed decision. 

Provide a XXXX XXXX : XXXX a detailed explanation of the denial, including specific reasons and any additional steps I XXXX take to appeal. 

The continued denial of my rightful discharge has caused me significant financial and emotional hardship. I respectfully urge the CFPB to investigate MOHELA 's mishandling of my case and ensure that MOHELA fulfills its obligation to fairly review borrower claims in compliance with federal protections. I have also include my XXXX XXXX approval dated XX/XX/XXXX, denial letters, and a letter from XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation