Consumer complaint received 2024-07-30 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Don't agree with the fees charged
Company: EdFinancial Services
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
Ed Financial is a debt collector per section 1692a Definitions of 15 USC XXXX XXXX, SUBCHAPTER V : DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES, From Title 15, COMMERCE AND TRADE, CHAPTER 41CONSUMER CREDIT PROTECTION, SUBCHAPTER VDEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES.

Ed Financial has not provided any proof that they are serving a legal process according to 1692a and are threatening to bypass my constitutional right to a fair trial and go directly to Defense Finance and Accounting Service to incorrectly and illegally garnish my pay at an amount far greater than the 15 % allowed by the Federal Wage Garnishment Law, Consumer Credit Protection Act 's Title III ( CCPA ) Revised XXXX XXXX and are actually at just over 136 %.

Ed Financial has sent numerous communications threatening to garnish my XXXX XXXXement pay, which is considered property, in violation of 1692d ( 1 ) The use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person.

Ed Financial is falsely representing the amount they can legally garnish and is violating 1692e. False or misleading representations ( 2 ) ( A ), ( 4 ), ( 5 ), ( 9 ), ( 10 ), ( 11 ), as articulated above and by the following : Ed Financial is using a deceptive means to coerce me into taking out a loan, referring to as consolidation what is actually a promise to pay, with an inflated principal balance ( inflating by 15 %, a purported amount of {$2500.00} ) while incorrectly claiming that the interest rate is 7.9 %.

Ed Financial is claiming that the total amount to be repaid is {$45000.00} while the original loan amount is {$16000.00}. This is a {$28000.00} increase or 170.6 % interest increase, while claiming that the unpaid interest is {$11000.00} ; an amount that has no apparent connection with any of the amounts applied to the statement for their account number XXXX. 

... as outlined in the interagency Expanded Examination Guidance for Subprime Lending Programs ... " predatory lending involves at least one, and perhaps all three, of the following elements : Making unaffordable loans based on the assets of the borrower rather than on the borrower 's ability to repay an obligation ; Inducing a borrower to refinance a loan repeatedly in order to charge high points and fees each time the loan is refinanced ( " loan flipping '' ) ; or Engaging in fraud or deception to conceal the true nature of the loan obligation, or ancillary products, from an unsuspecting or unsophisticated borrower. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Ed Financial is using the threat of garnishing {$370.00} from my XXXX retirement based on my XXXX retirement being {$2400.00} a month, which according to the Federal Wage Garnishment Law, Consumer Credit Protection Act 's Title III ( CCPA ) calculation guidelines is just under 40 %. Ed Financial refuses to acknowledge that half of my XXXX retirement is sent to my estranged wife who lives in a different state, even though I have sent written documented proof of this based on IRS records case # XXXX XXXX 'currently not collectible ' status because I have half of my retirement to live on : {$1200.00} a month. I am well below the poverty level, and below the standard deduction so as not to have to file a tax return either single or married filing separately. I send half of my retirement based on the Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act 20/20/20 Rule.

In fact, I have been 100 % below the poverty level since XXXX, and was probably around 130 % below the poverty level with a family of XXXX, when I was coerced by family members to take out the loan in XXXX, as well as in XXXX through XXXX. It appears in blurry 4-point print on the promise to pay that has vital text cut off the side of the page, has the incorrect school identification number, has incorrect or missing page numbers potentially containing vital information, that I authorized the school to verify my eligibility for this loan and it seems they did not or they would have noticed my poverty level, and I authorized ED to check my credit report at a time that my credit was plagued with so much credit card debt that I had to refinance my house to consolidate the debt to prevent foreclosure, apparently they did not. Within three years of signing up for this Parent Direct Plus loan my home was foreclosed on and my marriage was irretrievably broken. This Parent Direct Plus loan should be discharged for lack of fiduciary duty on the part of the school and ED, bordering on fraud, but being below the poverty level now I cant afford the legal council for the years of lawfare that Im sure would result from bring a case. 

Admittedly, divorcing my estranged wife might remedy the situation but being below the poverty level, that avenue is unaffordable. I have even attempted to take advantage of a benefit I am entitled to, provided by the XXXX XXXX that congress enacted, called XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 38 cfr 79 ) but even though I qualify financially, I have received no legal assistance because the legal assistance could not determine jurisdiction for this out of state XXXX division of property divorce, and Ive gotten bad advice, calls not returned, attempts to entice me into the incorrect jurisdiction, and a run-around, considering also that accepting court jurisdiction through these legal services might result in a divorce where more than the 50 % of my retirement that Im sending and have sent for the past 12 years could be ordered to my estranged wife leaving me in a worse state of poverty than Im already in. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. 

Ed Financial paperwork mailed to me does not notify me that they are a debt collector. Neither do they state that they are debt collectors on phone calls. Ed Financial uses the official DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SEAL, but Ed Financial is a contracted debt collector hiding their real name in deceptive obscurity.

Based on the above, Ed Financial is also violating 1692f, Unfair practices ( 1 ), ( 6 ) ( A ) ( B ), ( 8 ) Allowing other borrowers and alleged borrowers to prove their actual disposable pay to reduce their loan burden by allowing use of IRS filing information but not allowing me to do the same violates my constitutional right to equal protection under the law. 

I should be allowed to prove I live on half of my XXXX retirement by providing the IRS 1040s that are on file for the years XXXX through XXXX that the IRS forced me to file even though I was below the standard deduction and not required to file. IRS has accepted on the XXXX for years XXXX through XXXX that only half of my retirement is my taxable property. Therefore only half of my retirement pay should be considered disposable pay for calculations. Reference case # XXXX XXXX 'currently not collectible ' status. XXXX to present, I am below the standard deduction and not required to file.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation