Consumer complaint received 2018-03-13 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Received bad information about your loan
Company: Navient Solutions, LLC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
For some years, my spousal consolidation loan has been serviced by XXXX ( now XXXX ) XXXX XXXX. The loan was originated in XX/XX/XXXX with XXXX XXXX, then moved to XXXX by either assignment or merger-acquisition. The loan contain very small amounts of sub/unsub Stafford for myself, and large amounts of the same for my then-wife. Somewhere around XX/XX/XXXX/XX/XX/XXXX we filed for, and were approved, the Income Driven Repayment Plan called the Income-Based Repayment. I ( we ) have been on that same plan ever since. 

In XX/XX/XXXX, on XX/XX/XXXX I received my divorce decree from XXXX XXXX XXXX, formerly House, after me called Reason by married name, now divorced again remarried as XXXX. In XX/XX/XXXX, she was homeless indigent in Colorado and last I heard in XX/XX/XXXX she was homeless again in XXXX XXXX XXXX area ( Utah ). I do not have contact with her, even though 90 % of the loan balance is hers ; and, the divorce decree shows her responsible to pay. 

Recall in XX/XX/XXXX, the student loan servicing system was redesigned for more accuracy and ease of use with the StudentLoan.Gov web site. It also changed how the Income Based Repayment plans work, and gave new application questions that handle situations like mine. XXXX had not moved to that new processing format. Before then, I was instructed to file IDR Renewals as if I was married even though divorced. ( Back then the forms didn't not support things like married but I have no clue where the wife is! ) In XX/XX/XXXX, during an inquiry about renewing my Income Based Repayment I spoke with the NAVient predecessor XXXX. They had denied my IBR because I did not have a signature from XXXX. I informed them I am estranged from my former wife ( divorced ), and she is indigent and homeless somewhere with no contact. I sent them a copy of my divorce to prove. They told at that time to begin filing the IDR renewals as Married Separated so I would not have to get information about her and from her. I confirmed with her that this was AGAIN what they wanted me to do. 

NAVient, the assignee as late XX/XX/XXXX, now rejected by IBR plan renewal under IDR saying I need to file again and get XXXX 's signature. After calling them, someone speaking English as a second language refuted the complexity of the situation and said that I needed the spouse to cosign. She said this on XX/XX/XXXX, even though I said she's homeless and even her own family can't find her. I don't even know if she is still alive, but I suspect she is based on rumors I hear now and again. She said XXXX would have to submit her own request. Even if she wanted to, she could not : She has a loan not related to me in Default with the FFEL Program, which I know for a fact from post-divorce. 

I told her I am calling my lawyer and filing a CFPB complaint. I am unemployed and not eligible for unemployment due to a complex legal situation. I have no income and neither does my ex-wife since she's probably homeless. I have a call into my attorney firm about this to tell me if my assumptions are correct. 

I attached my IBR. Section 4A of OMB 1845-0102 for Income Based Repayment Requests says very clearly marital status information, both Separated ( single ) and Married but not reasonably locate. I know this is a marital consolidation loan, but the servicer is ignoring these items and refusing to acknowledge the situation simply because the co-borrower was once married to me. In fact, the form says I will be treated as Single. 

NAVient can not ignore this compelling history, estoppel inherited by assignment, and even the applicability of marital status questions already promulgated by it's regulator the Department of Education. 

Because of my job loss, when I sent the XXXX annual certification, to NAVient thru StudentLoans.Gov, it went to XXXX my other servicer. XXXX said I was not do for an IBR, which is correct on THEIR timeline ( which is Fall XX/XX/XXXX ). They recommended I change my payment based on zero income immediately, so if the response NAVient sent me is about the XX/XX/XXXX submission, they can blame it on bad programming decisions by the Department of Education ... I have XXXX control now who gets my submissions! 

Attached is my XX/XX/XXXX IBR renewal as last sent to XXXX before NAVient took over, accepted and processed under their requested instructions. Also attached is my XX/XX/XXXX IBR submitted last month to NAVient.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation