Consumer complaint received 2015-10-15 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Non-federal student loan
Issue: Disclosure verification of debt — Not given enough info to verify debt
Company: Frederick J. Hanna & Associates, P.C. (closed)
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
Attorney firm filed a civil action suit against me in XXXX XXXX, I had requested numerous times for validation of debt they stated I owed prior to my actual hearing date & never received. 

The attorney firm & the Plaintiff in which the firm claim to represent had XXXX conflicting statement. The loan the attorney firm stated I owe ( application date XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ) does not match the record of what the Plaintiff stated I owe ( application date XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ). Application dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX is a denied loan from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( see attachment ) & should have not been disbursed to the school on my behalf ( I had already XXXX on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX & did not need any additional financial aid ). The application date XXXX/XXXX/XXXX from another lender is the original loan/date in which I enrolled in school & completed all my financial aid via E-sign prior to me attending. Application XXXX/XXXX/XXXX is the proof of ownership of debt which the attorney has not provided. 
On XXXX/XXXX/XXXX at my hearing, the Attorney firm stated they would provide me documentation of this loan & I agreed to the judgement contingent upon them providing me this application dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. Me not knowing or unfamiliar with how the court system work, did not get the attorney firm or the judge to write on the judgement ORDERINGthe documents in which the attorney firm and I agreed upon during litigation. It is 8 months later & the attorney firm has not provided this affidavit/documentation or even responded to any of my requests. I have been paying them as agreed & I feel the attorney firm manipulated me into signing this judgement by false representation of them claiming they had personal knowledge of the validity & ownership of debt & yet could not support their claim with basic documents even though they claim to have affidavits & proof of debt. I felt intimidated during litigation ( facing the attorney firm & another associate w/ the attorney firm vs myself ) & pressured to sign or facing the judge who would demand the full amt of the debt of $ 10,000+. I am at a lost right now as to how to move forward & cant afford a lawyer to represent me properly in this matter. 

I have been taken advantage of by the school, XXXX College ( who currently has an open pending case vs CFPB ) who mishandled & pushed my loan through to XXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX ( a preferred lender of the school who had an arrangement with XXXX to sell the loan immediately after origination at a higher rate ). 

XXXX XXXX & its affiliates or subsidiaries of XXXX XXXX faced a class action ( XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, on behalf of all persons similarly situated vs XXXX XXXX , XXXX and XXXX XXXX ) with District Court of Connecticut for violating the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 ( c ) against XXXX XXXX individuals whom XXXX XXXX underwrote or originated a private loan between XX/XX/XXXX-XX/XX/XXXX stating intentional racial discrimination in XXXX & underwriting of loans using school specific pricing structures which minority borrowers incur higher interest rates and fees. 

I believe XXXX College intentionally withheld my original loan with my selected lender & then waited til days upon my graduation, creating a urgency & lessen my chance to review & consider other options to pressure me to resign my loan application under a different lender ( the school preferred lender ) unknowingly. 

The reason the attorney firm cant provide a copy of the application XXXX/XXXX/XXXX is because it was done electronically by a different bank/lender. The application dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX was denied & should not have ever been disbursed on my behalf because IT WAS DENIED & I never gave Transferability Consent of my E-sign loan transaction application dated XXXX/XXXX/XXXX to be transferred to another holder of the loan ( according to U.S. Dept of Ed concerning Electronic Student Loan Trans )

Company public response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation