Consumer complaint received 2026-03-12 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Received bad information about your loan
Company: Maximus Federal Services, Inc.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/XXXX Aidvantage U.S. Department of Education Servicer XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Consumer financial Protection Bureau https : //www.consumerfinance.gov/ CFPB Complaint File XXXX XXXX [ Aidvantage Office of the Customer Advocate ] Federal Student Aid Ombudsman Group U.S. Department of Education XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Re : Deficiency Notice Incomplete and Nonresponsive Production Borrower : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Loans XXXX ( Direct Stafford Subsidized/Unsubsidized ) To Whom It May Concern : I write to place Aidvantage on formal notice that its recent correspondence remains materially deficient and nonresponsive to my written disputes and records requests. I have now spent substantial time reviewing multiple letters and enclosures that only partially address isolated portions of my requests while omitting the account-level records necessary to verify the underlying issues. The piecemeal nature of the production has unnecessarily complicated review and has not resolved the core dispute. My dispute is straightforward. I am asking Aidvantage to show, with actual records, how my payment obligations were calculated, how my payments were applied, when and why any balance was increased, what notices were sent, and what data was furnished to the credit bureaus. The materials sent so far do not do that. Most importantly, the account history you provided appears to confirm the core problem I raised. The history shows that from approximately XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, my monthly {$350.00} payments were applied entirely to interest, with no reduction to principal during that period. That is exactly why I asked for the underlying accounting records. Your production still does not explain why those payments were treated that way, what interest balance supposedly remained, when that interest was exhausted, or why principal did not begin to decrease until later. In addition, Aidvantage still has not produced the records showing how and why my required payment amount was increased. You have sent schedule letters and general repayment-plan materials, but you have not sent the actual worksheet, data inputs, formulas, or internal servicing records used to determine the new monthly amount. You also have not produced valid notice proof showing when that change was sent, where it was sent, and whether it was sent by a legally compliant method. If Aidvantage relies on electronic notice, then I request proof of my consent to electronic delivery, the exact email address used, the date sent, and any bounce or non-delivery logs. Aidvantage also has still not produced the full pre-transfer XXXX history in a usable form. I requested the records showing how the XX/XX/XXXX signed repayment arrangement was implemented, how the balances were carried into servicing after XXXX, and how each payment was applied beginning in XXXX. What you sent is not a complete loan-by-loan accounting from that point forward. For clarity, the following records remain outstanding and are again requested : 1. The full loan-by-loan transaction history for Loans XXXX from XX/XX/XXXX to present, including effective date, posted date, transaction type, and payment allocation to principal, interest, and fees. 2. The month-by-month amount due and due date for each loan, and the calculation showing how any past-due amount was determined. 3. The complete capitalization history, including the date, amount, reason, and resulting balance effect for each capitalization event. 4. The exact worksheet and input data used to set or increase my payment amount in XXXX and after. 5. The complete notice file for all payment changes, delinquency notices, and adverse determinations, including copies sent, delivery method, address or email used, and any proof of valid electronic consent and delivery. 6. The complete credit-reporting support file, including the month-by-month data furnished to the credit bureaus supporting 30/60/90-day delinquency reporting. 7. The full XXXX-era history and transfer records needed to connect the XX/XX/XXXX agreement and payment history to the current Aidvantage loan records. 8. The complete XX/XX/XXXX enclosure set, including all omitted pages and confirmation of the total page count. This is not a request for general information. It is a request for the specific records needed to verify whether Aidvantage has billed, applied payments, and reported this account correctly. Please treat this as a formal deficiency notice. If the missing records are not produced, then Aidvantages past-due assertions and derogatory credit furnishing remain unsubstantiated. I therefore request that Aidvantage maintain the account in a neutral dispute status and refrain from any additional negative credit reporting while this dispute remains unresolved. Please provide the missing records within 10 days. If any requested record is not available, identify it specifically, explain why it is unavailable, identify the custodian of that record, and state whether it ever existed. Footnote of the response letters from AidVantage : XX/XX/XXXX letter enclosing what it described as the documents I requested. In substance, this response did not produce the requested transaction-level accounting or notice proof. Instead, it included a prior payment-schedule letter and general schedule information. That may reflect what payment amount Aidvantage later asserted, but it does not show how that amount was calculated, what data was used, or what authority justified the change. XX/XX/XXXX letter stating that it investigated my XXXX dispute and concluded that its reporting was accurate ; a conclusion without producing the records that support the conclusion. It does not provide the month-by-month due chain, the basis for the delinquency aging, the Metro 2 data fields used, or the documentary basis for 30/60/90-day reporting. XX/XX/XXXX letter response that attempts to explain the alleged delinquencythat the required monthly payment became {$490.00} effective XX/XX/XXXX and that my payments remained {$350.00}, which it says caused the delinquency ; includes a transaction history beginning with the XX/XX/XXXX transfer-in entries and then monthly payment entries thereafter. XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, my monthly {$350.00} payments were applied entirely to interest and not to principal, while principal remained unchanged during that period. Principal reduction appears only later. It also reflects later capitalized-interest entries in XX/XX/XXXX. Partially addressed my request for payment history and partially addressed Aidvantages claimed reason for delinquency. Deficiency : it still did not explain why those XXXX payments were applied entirely to interest, what specific interest balance justified that treatment, when that interest was exhausted, why principal did not reduce sooner, what specific formula was used to raise the payment to {$490.00}, or what notice was sent before that increase took effect. XX/XX/XXXX Aidvantage sent one or more letters referring to a repayment plan application, including references to income-driven repayment. I did not request generic repayment-plan application materials as a substitute for the records demanded in my dispute. Deficiency : generic or stray application correspondence is not responsive to my request for a complete accounting, a payment-recalculation worksheet, or notice proof. XX/XX/XXXX letter of generic information describing repayment options. Deficiency : this is educational material, not evidence. It does not answer any of the accounting, notice, or credit-reporting questions I raised. XX/XX/XXXX Letter of general explanation of how interest accrues and how payments are generally applied. Again, that is not the same thing as proving how my account was handled. Deficiency : a generic explanation is not a substitute for a loan-specific ledger, transaction code history, or capitalization report. XX/XX/XXXX Letter provided summary information such as loan type, disbursement dates, original principal, and outstanding balances. Partially addressed my request for portfolio-level identification. XXXX : it still did not provide the month-by-month ledger, payment-change worksheet, notice proof, or furnishing data. XX/XX/XXXX letter of new schedule with updated balance and payment projections. Showing what Aidvantage currently claims the schedule is. Deficiency : it still did not provide the exact worksheet, formulas, input values, or rule set used to generate that schedule, and therefore still does not answer the underlying dispute. XX/XX/XXXX Letter appears to be a current billing snapshot showing no past-due amount as of that statement and showing how a recent payment was split between principal and interestit shows a present-tense billing snapshot. Deficiency : it does not repair the missing historical accounting and does not explain the delinquency reporting already made. XX/XX/XXXX letter and enclosures are the most important partial production so far because they include a longer transaction history and older servicing materials. However, even these materials remain incomplete and internally problematic. First, the transaction history continues to show the same critical issue : my {$350.00} payments during the period from roughly XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX appear to have been applied entirely to interest and not to principal. This confirms, rather than resolves, the precise issue I raised. Second, the legacy enclosures appear to be fragments from older systems rather than a clean, loan-by-loan accounting that bridges XXXXera servicing to the current Aidvantage loan structure. Third, the enclosure appears incomplete on its face. The page markings indicate that the enclosed pages are part of a larger set, yet the full set was not produced. This raises a serious completeness problem. Deficiency : incomplete production ; fragmented legacy data ; no certified full prior-servicer history ; no complete bridge from pre-transfer servicing to the current loan numbering and balances. XX/XX/XXXX Letter simply states that Aidvantage is still researching the account and that I should continue making payments. Deficiency : no substantive response and no production of the missing records.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation