Consumer complaint received 2024-11-27 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Private student loan
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Problem with customer service
Company: MOHELA
State: MN

Complaint narrative:
Thousands of students were scammed by XXXX  into taking out predatory private loans to attend for profit online schools such as the one I attended, The XXXX XXXX XXXX. As a matter of fact, ThXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was investigated by the US Department of Education , the City Attorney of XXXX XXXX , the Project on Predatory Student Lending, the Supreme Court , the US Department of Justice , the Legal Services XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the Attorney Generals Office. 
Because of the numerous claims of fraud and misconduct perpetrated by these online for profit schools, such as The Art Institutes International-MN, I was able to file a Borrower Defense claim with the Dept. of Education against The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and my Federal loans of {$34000.00} were discharged, payments made were refunded, and my credit repaired. 
My Borrower Defense Claim was also part of the Sweet Vs. Cardona settlement for which I was a full class member. 
I am aware that XXXX  was sued by 39 state AGs regarding their predatory loans to attend these online for-profit schools and that XXXX XXXX were a " preferred '' lending company in a " deal '' with these schools during the early XXXX XXXX. These private loans with a high risk of default were part of a package deal offered to " for profit online schools ''. But loans made to students in states outside of the agreement, or those who were not in default for 7 months or more during a " specific '' time frame, were excluded. I am sure this was a big win for XXXX, but what a sham of a settlement deal for the rest of borrowers scammed into taking loans to at least XXXX for profit online schools. After the AG settlement, didn't XXXX  also get out of the Federal student loan business due to scrutiny from lawmakers and borrower advocates? Didn't XXXX have to pay restitution to the Federal student loan borrowers for not informing students of XXXX payments students could have enrolled in, but instead steered toward forbearance? Furthermore, hasn't XXXX  been sued at least a half dozen times for other predatory loan practices and illegal collection practices? 
I am also aware of a " pilot '' program by which XXXX is sending out " applications '' to select students who may have filed Borrower Defense claims against their schools and were approved. This application is a sham. Why do we need to prove anything? XXXX  knows who we are. Under the FTC " XXXX XXXX '' XXXX  is liable for giving predatory loans in connection with online for-profit schools. Time is running out for XXXX to do right by students who were scammed into taking out private loans to attend online for profit colleges who have committed misconduct and misrepresented themselves to the public to entice students to enroll. Senator XXXX XXXX has sent a letter to XXXXXXXX XXXX  CEO asking to discharge these loans NOW! It's time Navient do the right thing and discharge all these predatory private loans made to attend online for profit schools NOW! 

https XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation