Consumer complaint received 2026-04-10 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Received bad information about your loan
Company: MOHELA
State: MN

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this as a formal dispute under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. XXXX et seq., regarding MOHELAs reporting of XXXX separate XXXX-day delinquencies. These derogatory entries are inaccurate, materially misleading, and the direct result of a failure in loan servicing, specifically MOHELAs failure to provide reasonable notice and maintain account access following a system transition under its control. This is not a request for goodwill. This is a demand for correction of reporting that does not comply with federal law or applicable servicing standards. XX/XX/XXXX FACTUAL BACKGROUND The loans at issue entered repayment in XX/XX/XXXX following a prolonged deferment period. During this time, MOHELA implemented a platform transition requiring borrower re-registration to access account information. MOHELA failed to ensure continuity of borrower access or provide effective notice of this requirement. As a result : I did not receive billing statements or repayment notices I did not have access to my loan account ( XXXX ) or payment portal I was not aware that repayment commenced in XX/XX/XXXX I first became aware of any delinquency on XX/XX/XXXX, through third-party credit monitoring alerts. Upon discovery, I immediately contacted MOHELA and brought all accounts current in good standing. At no point prior to XX/XX/XXXX, did I receive effective notice of repayment status, delinquency, or risk of credit reporting. XXXX. FAILURE TO PROVIDE REASONABLE NOTICE ( SERVICING DEFICIENCY ) MOHELAs conduct constitutes a failure to meet federal servicing expectations applicable to Title XXXX loan servicers. Federal student loan servicers are required to provide clear, timely, and effective communication regarding repayment obligations. See : XX/XX/XXXXXXXX ( b ) XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX Additionally, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has stated that servicers must maintain reasonable policies and procedures to ensure accurate information and effective communication with borrowers. ( CFPB XXXX XXXX ) MOHELA failed to meet these standards by : Implementing a platform migration that disrupted borrower access Requiring borrower re-registration without ensuring receipt of such notice Relying exclusively on electronic communication despite :XX/XX/XXXX A multi-year deferment period XX/XX/XXXXA material system change affecting account access Failing to provide redundant or escalated communication ( written or telephonic ) Given the severity of consequences associated with XXXX delinquency reporting, this conduct does not meet a reasonable standard of care. XXXX. DEPRIVATION OF OPPORTUNITY TO CURE MOHELAs servicing failure directly deprived me of any meaningful opportunity to prevent or cure the delinquency. No effective notice of repayment commencement was received No notice at XXXX orXX/XX/XXXXdays delinquent was received All three loans were reported simultaneously atXX/XX/XXXX days past due The CFPB has emphasized that servicers must not engage in practices that unfairly prevent borrowers from avoiding delinquency or default. ( CFPB Supervisory Highlights Student Loan Servicing ) Further, MOHELAs own policies provide for forbearance and alternative repayment options designed to prevent delinquency. By failing to provide effective notice, MOHELA deprived me of the ability to utilize these protections. XX/XX/XXXX FCRA VIOLATIONS INACCURATE AND MISLEADING REPORTING Under the FCRA : 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( XX/XX/XXXX ) prohibits furnishing inaccurate information 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) requires correction of incomplete or inaccurate information 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( b ) requires reasonable investigation upon dispute Information may be considered inaccurate if it is materially misleading. See XXXX v. XXXX & XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX ). The reporting here is materially misleading because it : Suggests borrower neglect or unwillingness to pay Omits the critical fact that the borrower lacked access and notice due to servicer-controlled system changes Reflects a servicing failure rather than borrower conduct XX/XX/XXXX UNFAIR ACTS AND PRACTICES ( XXXX ) MOHELAs conduct constitutes an unfair act or practice under XXXXXX/XX/XXXX. Substantial injury : XXXXpoint credit score reduction Not reasonably avoidable : borrower lacked access and notice No countervailing benefit XX/XX/XXXX BORROWER HISTORY AND IMMEDIATE CURE I have a long-standing history of timely repayment across multiple student loan obligations with no prior delinquencies. Upon receiving actual notice, I immediately brought all accounts current in good standing. This confirms that the issue was not willingness or capacity to pay, but lack of information caused by servicing failure. XXXX. ADMINISTRATIVE FORBEARANCE CONFIRMATION OF SERVICING ISSUE MOHELA placed my account into administrative forbearance from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, despite no such request from me. This action implicitly acknowledges that circumstances existed warranting relief. However, this intervention occurred only after severe credit damage had already been reported. The timing of this action underscores the underlying servicing failure. XXXX. REQUEST FOR RELIEF I request the following : XXXX. Immediate deletion of all XXXXday delinquency reporting XXXX. Correction of all credit bureau reporting to reflect current, non-delinquent status XXXX. Written confirmation of deletion and correction XXXX. Consideration of retroactive administrative forbearance for XXXX XXXX XXXX. DUPLICATIVE AND DISPROPORTIONATE CREDIT REPORTING MOHELA treats these loans as a single borrower account, as evidenced by the application of a single administrative forbearance covering all loans collectively. However, MOHELA reported XXXX separate XXXXday delinquenciesone per loanthereby multiplying the credit impact of what is, in substance, a single servicing event. This inconsistent treatment is materially misleading under the FCRA. See XXXX v. XXXX & XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX ). This reporting : Artificially amplifies the severity of the alleged delinquency Distorts the borrowers credit profile Creates disproportionate harm relative to the underlying circumstance At a minimum, this reporting should be consolidated or corrected. More appropriately, it should be deleted in full. XX/XX/XXXX CONCLUSION The reported delinquencies are the direct result of MOHELAs failure to provide effective notice and maintain account accessibility during a system transition under its control. The continued reporting of these delinquencies is inaccurate, materially misleading, and inconsistent with federal law. If this matter is not resolved promptly, I will pursue all available remedies through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other appropriate regulatory or legal channels. XXXX. CONFIRMATION OF ACCESS FAILURE On XX/XX/XXXX, with direct assistance from MOHELAs credit servicing personnel, I was required to complete a re-registration process in order to regain access to my account. Prior to this intervention : I did not have functional access to my loan account I was unable to view statements, payment status, or repayment obligations I did not have the ability to make payments through the platform The fact that MOHELA personnel were required to assist in restoring access confirms that access was not reasonably available to me prior to that time. This further supports that the reported delinquencies resulted from a failure of account access and communication, not borrower inaction.

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