Consumer complaint received 2025-09-02 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: Maximus Federal Services, Inc.
State: ME

Complaint narrative:
This is an ongoing dispute. Please review the attached screenshot and read my rebutal. It's simple, the XXXX is irrelevant as the loan originated in XXXX. They are using an admin or clerical error as justification for reaging this loan. This is my last and final attempt to resolve this without the judicial system. 

To Whom It May Concern, I am formally disputing the Department of Educations decision to continue reporting my XXXX XXXX XXXX as in default. I believe this reporting is unfair, misleading, and inconsistent with both the stated purpose of the XXXX XXXX program and federal consumer protection law. 

XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX Assignment Date Is Irrelevant I borrowed my XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX. The Department acknowledges that the loan was later assigned to it on XX/XX/XXXX, after my school transferred ownership. However, I was a defaulted borrower well before XXXX, the year XXXX XXXX was announced. The loans legal origination and default history predate the XXXX XXXX program, and those facts should determine eligibility for relief. 

The Departments reliance on an administrative transfer date rather than the loans origination or default date is arbitrary. Borrowers should not be penalized for internal paperwork delays between schools and the Department that are outside their control. 

XXXX. Misleading Credit Reporting Under FCRA The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) requires that furnishers report information that is accurate and not misleading. 

My XXXX XXXX received XXXX XXXX protections, removing default reporting. 

My XXXX XXXX, also in default during the XXXX XXXX period, is still being reported negatively. 

This creates a misleading and incomplete credit history. Courts have repeatedly recognized that information may be inaccurate under FCRA if it creates a misleading impression : XXXX XXXX XXXX & XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) information can be technically true but still misleading. 

XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) incomplete reporting of student loan status can be misleading under FCRA. 

XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX & XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) furnishers must investigate and ensure fair reporting when disputes are raised. 

By reporting XXXX set of loans as rehabilitated under XXXX XXXX while continuing to report another as defaulted, the Department is creating a distorted view of my repayment history. 

XXXX. Arbitrary and Capricious Agency Action ( APA ) The Administrative Procedure Act ( 5 U.S.C. 706 ) prohibits agency actions that are arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. The Departments decision to exclude my XXXX XXXX from Fresh Start protections because of an assignment date is precisely such an action : The loan was in default during Fresh Start. 

XXXX was promised to all defaulted borrowers. 

The only reason for exclusion is an administrative transfer timing issue beyond my control. 

This creates inconsistent treatment among similarly situated borrowers and undermines the Departments own public policy goals.

4. Undermining the Intent of Fresh Start The Department publicly stated that Fresh Start was created to provide a clean slate to defaulted borrowers, eliminating the stigma of default and allowing reentry into repayment. By refusing to apply these protections to my XXXX XXXX, despite its default status during the XXXX XXXX period, the Department has undermined the very purpose of the program. 

XXXX. Consumer Harm As a direct result of this inconsistent reporting, I face : Lower credit scores, limiting access to housing and credit.

Higher interest rates on any credit I can obtain. 

Potential employment and insurance consequences due to negative credit reporting. 

This is ongoing and substantial harm that would not exist if the Department applied XXXX XXXX relief consistently to all my defaulted loans. 

Requested Resolution I respectfully request that the Department : Cease negative credit reporting of my XXXXXXXX XXXX default. 

Correct my credit reports to remove the default status associated with this loan, consistent with my Direct Loans. 

Provide written confirmation of these corrections. 

Conclusion My XXXX XXXX origination in XXXX and default status prior to XXXX clearly place it within the intended scope of the XXXX XXXX program. The Departments reliance on a XXXX assignment date to deny relief is arbitrary, misleading under FCRA, inconsistent with program intent, and harmful to me as a consumer. 

For these reasons, I request immediate correction of my credit reporting.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation