Consumer complaint received 2025-06-16 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: Nelnet, Inc.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX : Nelnet, XXXX for XXXX Department of Education Complaint Summary : This complaint concerns Nelnets continued reporting of inaccurate and unverifiable information to consumer reporting agencies ( CRAs ) regarding an alleged XXXX student loan account. This is now my XXXX attempt to dispute this account and request proper verification. Nelnet has failed to comply with federal law, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), and continues to harm my credit profile with false information. 
Details of the Issue : I am disputing a federal student loan account that Nelnet is reporting to the CRAs. In previous communications, I specifically requested proper validation of this alleged debt, including a complete, unmarred Master Promissory Note ( MPN ) bearing my wet ink signature that establishes a direct contract between myself and the XXXX Department of Education or Nelnet. 
Nelnet has failed to provide this. Instead, they sent a redacted and altered copy of an XXXX naming XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX lender with whom I have no contractual relationship. No supporting documents or assignment records were provided to show how Nelnet or the XXXX Department of Education acquired the rights to collect or report this debt. 
Under FCRA XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), data furnishers are legally required to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of information reported and to cease reporting unverifiable or disputed information. Despite this, Nelnet continues to report this unverifiable account to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 
Furthermore, their latest response to my previous CFPB complaint ( XX/XX/year> ) ignores the legal requirement to fully validate the debt and wrongfully asserts that they are not required to provide further proof. They claim that sufficient verification has been provided, despite offering no complete and unredacted contract proving a valid loan obligation between me and the XXXX Department of Education. 
Violations : FCRA Violation ( XXXX ) : Reporting unverifiable and inaccurate account data after receiving a formal dispute. 
FTC XXXX Violation ( XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) : Engaging in deceptive practices by continuing to collect and report a debt without proving ownership or valid contractual obligation. 
FDCPA Implications : Though student loan servicers are typically exempt from FDCPA, attempting to collect or report debts without proving legal title or chain of assignment constitutes deceptive conduct. 
Contract Law Violation : No evidence of a valid contract with Nelnet or the XXXX Department of Education has been furnished. A redacted promissory note with XXXX XXXX is insufficient to establish a legal obligation. 
Requested Resolution : XXXX deletion of the disputed tradeline from XXXX CRAs XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) until full legal validation is provided. 
Provide a full, unredacted, and original Master Promissory Note with my wet ink signature or cease all collection and reporting efforts. 
Full investigation into XXXX failure to comply with dispute procedures under the FCRA. 
XXXX action for willful noncompliance and continued consumer harm. 
Supporting Facts : This is my fourth dispute of this issue. 
No valid contract has been presented to me. 
The promissory note I was provided is redacted and lists XXXX XXXX as lenderno legal assignment or contract with Nelnet or XXXX was ever signed by me. 
Conclusion : I am asking the CFPB to reopen this matter under a new complaint, hold Nelnet accountable under the law, and ensure that my consumer rights under the FCRA and FTC XXXX are fully enforced.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation