Consumer complaint received 2025-12-09 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Federal student loan debt
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged
Company: EdFinancial Services
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/year> XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, MI XXXX Re : THIRD NOTICE OF DISPUTE, FAILURE OF VALIDATION, AND RECORD OF STATUTORY NON-COMPLIANCE Creditor / Furnisher : Edfinancial Services Account Number Referenced : XXXX Loans Alleged : Federal Direct XXXX Loans XXXX through XXXX To Whom It May Concern, This correspondence constitutes my THIRD FORMAL DISPUTE and NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE regarding the above-referenced alleged student loan accounts. This letter is issued to memorialize your continuing failure to lawfully verify or substantiate the alleged debt, despite repeated written disputes and requests for competent evidence. 

This letter is further intended to preserve the administrative and evidentiary record and to document statutory violations arising from your continued furnishing of disputed information without lawful verification, authorization, or consistency. 

I. FAILURE OF VALIDATION AND FAILURE OF COMPETENT EVIDENCE Your recent response again relies on generalized explanations regarding federal student loan processes, internal database summaries, and alleged electronic records. You have failed, for a third time, to produce evidence sufficient to establish that the alleged debt is legally attributable to me.

Specifically, you have not produced : 1.A Master Promissory Note bearing an authenticated, attributable signature that can be independently verified as mine.

2.IP logs, audit trails, digital certificate records, or system metadata establishing that any alleged electronic signature originated from a device, location, or identity under my control.

3.Contemporaneous enrollment certifications bearing my authorization.

4.Proof of delivery or receipt of disbursement funds by me.

5.Proof of affirmative acceptance of alleged loan proceeds.

6.Proof of lawful identity verification protocols performed prior to disbursement.

7.A complete administrative record as required under Title IV of the Higher Education Act.

Invoices, internal summaries, or database printouts do not constitute competent evidence of a debt obligation and do not establish assent, privity, authorization, or contractual liability.

II. FURNISHING OF INFORMATION WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION OR KNOWLEDGE You continue to furnish information regarding these alleged accounts to consumer reporting agencies despite unresolved disputes and without lawful verification. Furnishing information under these circumstances constitutes statutory non-compliance.

III. FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT VIOLATIONS ( 15 USC 1681 et seq. ) The following violations are hereby asserted : 1.15 USC 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing information with knowledge of inaccuracies.

Violation : You continue to report disputed accounts without possessing competent verification establishing the debt is mine.

2.15 USC 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) Failure to correct incomplete or inaccurate information.

Violation : You failed to correct or remove disputed information after notice of incompleteness and lack of attribution.

3.15 USC 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 3 ) Failure to mark accounts as disputed.

Violation : Furnishing has occurred without proper dispute notation across all bureaus.

4.15 USC 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation.

Violation : Repeating the same generalized response and invoice summaries does not constitute a reasonable investigation.

5.15 USC 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( D ) Failure to delete or modify unverifiable information.

Violation : Information remains furnished despite lack of verification.

6.15 USC 1681e ( b ) Failure to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy.

Violation : Alleged tradelines are not consistent across Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion, demonstrating unreliable and inaccurate reporting.

IV. INCONSISTENT AND NON-CONCURRENT CREDIT REPORTING The alleged accounts do not match across all three major consumer reporting agencies with respect to balances, status, dates, or remarks. Non-concurrent furnishing is prima facie evidence that reasonable procedures are not being followed, rendering the information legally unreliable under the FCRA.

V. FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT VIOLATIONS ( 15 USC 1692 et seq. ) While Edfinancial attempts to disclaim FDCPA applicability, liability may attach where collection activity occurs by furnishing derogatory credit information and asserting payment obligations.

Violations include : 1.15 USC 1692e False or misleading representations.

Violation : Representing a legal obligation without competent proof of liability.

2.15 USC 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ) Misrepresentation of the character or legal status of the debt.

Violation : Debt is represented as valid without proof of authorization or acceptance.

3.15 USC 1692f Use of unfair or unconscionable means.

Violation : Coercive credit reporting used in lieu of lawful verification.

VI. TRUTH IN LENDING ACT VIOLATIONS ( 15 USC 1601 et seq. ) 1.15 USC 1638 ( a ) Failure of required material disclosures.

Violation : No evidence exists that mandatory disclosures were knowingly received or agreed to.

2.15 USC 1640 ( a ) Civil liability for nondisclosure.

Violation : Liability attaches where disclosures and authorization can not be proven.

Electronic signature claims alone do not satisfy disclosure or consent requirements absent verifiable attribution.

VII. DEMAND AND NOTICE You are hereby placed on notice that : 1.Continued furnishing without lawful verification constitutes willful non-compliance.

2.Repeating invoices or statutory explanations without proof does not cure violations.

3.Failure to delete unverifiable information exposes you to civil liability under : a. 15 USC 1681n ( willful non-compliance ) b. 15 USC 1681o ( negligent non-compliance ) 4.This letter serves as evidence of notice, opportunity to cure, and record preservation.

VIII. FORMAL DEMAND Accordingly, I demand the following within thirty ( 30 ) days : 1.Permanent deletion of all unverifiable tradelines from all consumer reporting agencies.

2.Written confirmation of deletion.

3.Cessation of furnishing related to the alleged accounts.

4.Preservation of all records, logs, metadata, and communications.

Failure to comply will be deemed a knowing continuation of statutory violations and bad-faith furnishing. 

This correspondence is made without waiver of any rights or remedies, all of which are expressly reserved. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Michigan

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation