Consumer complaint received 2026-01-05 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Private student loan
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Received bad information about your loan
Company: Navient Solutions, LLC.
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
ACCOUNT INFORMATION Loan Numbers : XXXX and XXXX Original Principal : {$55000.00} ( XXXX loans : {$25000.00} disbursed XX/XX/XXXX ; {$30000.00} disbursed XX/XX/XXXX ) Current Balance : Approximately {$100000.00} Interest Rate : 14.875 % Total Paid to Date : {$62000.00} ( of which {$53000.00} was interest 87 % ) School : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  CA Enrollment Period : XX/XX/XXXX ( while on XXXX XXXX ) XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  COMPLAINT NARRATIVE We are filing this complaint regarding Navient 's repeated arbitrary denials of this School Misconduct Discharge application for XXXX private student loans totaling {$55000.00} ( now approximately {$100000.00} due to 14.875 % interest and forbearance steering in XXXX ). 

PATTERN OF ARBITRARY DENIALS We have submitted School Misconduct Discharge applications THREE times. Each time, Navient has denied the claim using boilerplate denial codes without providing individualized analysis or addressing the specific evidence submitted. The most recent denial, dated XX/XX/XXXX, cited generic codes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 ( " insufficient evidence of misconduct, '' " insufficient evidence of harm, '' " can not establish connection, '' etc. ) without explaining how the detailed evidence failed to meet their criteria. 

FEDERAL PRECEDENT ALREADY VALIDATES THE FRAUD The XXXX Department of Education has already validated the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  fraud by discharging these federal student loans under the XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX class action settlement. The Department found that AAU engaged in " widespread and pervasive substantial misrepresentations '' regarding : Employment rates and job placement Salary expectations for graduates Quality of instruction and career services Transferability of credits These private loans were disbursed for the same enrollment period ( XXXX ), at the same school, based on the same fraudulent misrepresentations. The only difference is the lender. 

CFPB GUIDANCE REQUIRES INDIVIDUALIZED REVIEW The CFPB 's XX/XX/XXXX Supervisory Highlights ( Issue 36 ) specifically addresses private student loan servicers and school misconduct discharge programs. The guidance states that servicers must : Provide " individualized and detailed '' denial reasons Give " due deference '' to Department of Education findings and court determinations Implement a claims process that is " not unduly burdensome '' Navient 's boilerplate denial codes violate each of these requirements. They did not address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX federal discharge precedent The DOE 's XX/XX/XXXX finding of " widespread and pervasive substantial misrepresentations '' by AAU The {$6.00} XXXX Art Institutes discharge affecting XXXX borrowers The XXXX XXXX opinion in XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX documenting illegal incentive compensation schemes The {$60.00} XXXX Massachusetts XXXX settlement The {$57.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX settlement The XXXX AG XXXX XXXX XXXX federal whistleblower lawsuit that settled in XXXX California XXXX reports showing XXXX documented salary outcomes for photography graduates DOCUMENTED HARM Over 15 years, {$62000.00} has been paid on these loans. Of that amount : {$7900.00} went to principal {$53000.00} ( 87 % ) was consumed by interest Despite paying more than the original principal in total payments, the balance has nearly doubled. We have been on reduced interest payment plans for over 10 years in an effort to avoid default. 

As a military veteran with XXXX special needs children requiring lifetime care, this debt has forced impossible choices between loan payments and therapies for the children. The psychological toll has been severe, including XXXX and suicidal ideation from the hopelessness of debt that grows faster than can be paid. 

ACTIVE CLASS ACTION FOR THESE EXACT PRACTICES Navient is currently a defendant in XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Illinois, Case No. XXXX, filed XX/XX/XXXX ), a class action lawsuit alleging that Navient " routinely, arbitrarily, and in bad faith denies legitimate XXXX XXXX XXXX applications. '' The practices alleged in that lawsuit match exactly what Navient has done committed here. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX A XX/XX/XXXX investigation by XXXX XXXX XXXX found that Navient denies approximately 80 % of School Misconduct Discharge claims, often using " opaque '' reasoning that prevents applicants from understanding why they were denied or how to appeal. 

WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED Investigation into Navient 's pattern of arbitrary denials of School Misconduct Discharge applications, particularly for borrowers whose federal loans have already been XXXX for the same school misconduct. 
Enforcement of the CFPB 's XX/XX/XXXX guidance requiring individualized review and due deference to DOE findings. 
Resolution of this specific claim, including : Full discharge of both loans Refund of payments made ( {$62000.00} ) Removal of negative credit reporting SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION We are attaching a XXXX resubmission package, which has been sent to XXXX ( XXXX current servicer ) which includes : Comprehensive Addendum responding to each denial code with hyperlinked government sources Original School Misconduct Discharge Application with detailed narrative Navient 's XX/XX/XXXX Denial Letter with boilerplate codes Additional sources cited in the documentation : DOE XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( StudentAid.gov ) CFPB Supervisory Highlights Issue XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX XXXX Navient XXXX action complaint XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX settlement Massachusetts AG settlement California BPPE Annual Reports

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation