Consumer complaint received 2026-04-08 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Trouble with how payments are being handled
Company: Nelnet, Inc.
State: SC

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding the prolonged failure of the U.S. Department of Education and my loan servicer, [ Nelnet ], to resolve my Borrower Defense to Repayment application filed on XX/XX/XXXX. Background : At the time of filing, I submitted all required documentation and supporting evidence through the official Borrower Defense application process. My application detailed misconduct by [ XXXX XXXX XXXX ], including material misrepresentations about [ job placement rates / program accreditation / career outcomes / other specific misconduct ]. Since that submission I have received : No substantive determination on my application No investigative findings No lawful explanation for the continued delay No timeline for resolution My Attempts to Resolve : I have made multiple prior attempts to obtain a status update and resolution, including : Written request via XXXX message center Phone call to [ Servicer Name ] requesting status Formal legal correspondence demanding action under federal borrower protection laws Despite these efforts, no final response has been issued. I have received only generic acknowledgments with no substantive information about the status of my claim. Violation of Federal Obligations : This delay is inconsistent with federal obligations requiring timely agency and servicer action : 5 U.S.C. 555 ( b ) requires matters presented to a federal agency to be concluded within a reasonable time. 5 U.S.C. 706 ( 1 ) authorizes action when agency action is unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed. 20 U.S.C. 1087e ( h ) and 34 C.F.R. 685.206 ( c ), 685.222 establish borrower rights to discharge where institutional misconduct is alleged and documented. Relevance of Sweet v. McMahon : On XX/XX/XXXX, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled against the Department of Education 's attempt to delay relief for approximately 205,000 borrowers under the Sweet v. McMahon settlement. The court stated : " The DOE can point to no changed circumstances that render it inequitable to apply the same settlement agreement that it bargained for years ago. '' The Department itself acknowledged " material breach '' of the settlement in a XX/XX/XXXX letter to plaintiffs ' counsel. This demonstrates a systemic pattern of delay and failure to process Borrower Defense claims that extends well beyond the Sweet class. Whether or not I am formally within the Sweet settlement class, I am entitled to timely adjudication of my claim under federal law. The Department can not lawfully maintain a two-tiered system where only litigation compels it to fulfill its statutory duties. Harm : The ongoing delay has caused me significant harm, including : Continued accrual of interest on loans that should have been discharged Damage to my credit from reported delinquency or default status Inability to access housing, employment, or credit opportunities Prolonged financial instability and emotional distress [ Add any specific personal harm, e.g., wage garnishment, tax refund seizure ] Requested Resolution : I am requesting that the CFPB compel the Department of Education and [ Nelnet ] to : 1. Immediately process and approve my Borrower Defense application 2. Discharge all federal student loans I incurred to attend [ XXXX XXXX XXXX ] XXXX. Refund all payments I have made on these loans 4. Correct all adverse credit reporting related to these loans 5. Provide a written explanation if discharge is denied, including the factual and legal basis Conclusion : I filed my Borrower Defense application in good faith, with complete documentation, and have waited more than 3 years with no response. This is not a bureaucratic inconvenienceit is a violation of my rights under federal law. I respectfully request that the CFPB investigate and take action to ensure I receive the relief I am entitled to. This letter was sent to all 3 credit bureaus and to the Department of Education Loan servicing several time, even sent certified return mail receipt with no resolution for 3 years now

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation