Consumer complaint received 2025-05-16 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: MOHELA
State: LA

Complaint narrative:
Complaint Subject : Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Investigation, Unverified Reporting of Disputed Private Student Loan, and Willful Non-Compliance Mohela/XXXX  Complaint Description : I am filing this complaint against XXXX  for failing to conduct a reasonable investigation and for continuing to report unverified and potentially unenforceable information regarding a disputed private student loan serviced by Mohela and originally issued by XXXX XXXX XXXX 

Background : On XX/XX/year>, I submitted a formal dispute to XXXX  challenging the validity and enforceability of the loan due to documented misconduct by XXXX XXXX XXXX. This misconduct was recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, resulting in my Borrower Defense to Repayment Approval on XX/XX/year>, which fully discharged my federal loans. 


Mohela eventually produced the original promissory note, which explicitly contains the XXXX XXXX XXXX Under the FTC Holder Rule, I am entitled to assert claims and defenses against Mohela that I would have against XXXX XXXX XXXX including defenses related to fraudulent misrepresentation and misconduct. 


Despite this clear evidence, XXXX  closed its investigation with the status " Remains, '' indicating that Mohela 's reporting was considered valid, despite the unresolved dispute and the XXXX XXXX protections clearly outlined in the promissory note. 



Legal Violations Cited : 15 U.S.C. 1681i Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Investigation : XXXX  did not reasonably investigate the enforceability of the debt under the Holder Rule, nor did it validate Mohelas right to collect given the documented misconduct by XXXX XXXX XXXX 


15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) Inaccurate Reporting of Disputed Debt : XXXX  failed to ensure the information reported by Mohela was accurate and legally enforceable, ignoring my Borrower Defense approval and XXXX XXXX  rights. 


15 U.S.C. 1692e Misrepresentation of the Legal Status of Debt : By reporting the debt as valid despite its disputed status and the existence of the Holder Rule clause, XXXX  misrepresented its legal enforceability. 


Willful Non-Compliance ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n ) : The continued reporting of this debtdespite evidence of misconduct, federal discharge, and the Holder Rule protectionsconstitutes willful non-compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). The credit bureaus were notified and provided evidence yet chose to disregard these legal protections.

Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) : The FCRA mandates that credit reporting agencies maintain maximum possible accuracy in reporting. XXXX failed this standard by verifying the debt without proper validation from Mohela, especially in light of the misconduct claims and Borrower Defense approval.

Relief Sought : Immediate Deletion or Correction of the Disputed Account : I request that XXXX  either remove the disputed Mohela/XXXX account from my credit report or reflect its contested status, acknowledging the enforceability issues under the Holder Rule and my federal Borrower Defense approval . 


Full Investigative Report : I demand a comprehensive report from Experianoutlining the specific steps taken to verify Mohela 's claims, particularly in light of the XXXX XXXX and documented misconduct by XXXX XXXX XXXX 


Enhanced Investigation Procedures : I request that XXXX  strengthen its investigation protocols to prevent inaccurate reporting of disputed debts, especially where promissory note clauses and federal approvals directly impact the validity of the debt. 


Request for Punitive Damages : I am requesting punitive damages under 15 U.S.C. 1681n ( a ) ( 2 ) for willful non-compliance with the FCRA. The evidence provided was substantial, yet XXXX  knowingly continued reporting without proper verification.

Supporting Documents Attached : Original Dispute Letter to XXXX XXXX XXXX " Remains '' Status Letter ( if filing with XXXX  ) Promissory Note with the XXXX XXXX Clause Borrower Defense Approval Letter from the Department of Education Additional Points of Emphasis : XXXX  XXXX XXXX places Mohela in direct liability for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX documented misconduct, which was legally recognized through the XXXX XXXX approval. 


XXXX  is knowingly reporting unverified debt, constituting willful non-compliance under the FCRA. 


This is not an isolated error but a systemic failure to investigate and validate consumer disputes, even when federal documentation and promissory note clauses indicate non-enforceability. 


Given the refusal to reasonably investigate, I am also considering legal remedies under 15 U.S.C. 1681n for willful violations of the FCRA.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation