Consumer complaint received 2025-12-19 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Private student loan
Issue: Issue with income share agreement — Marketing or disclosure issues
Company: MOHELA
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
Personal Statement School Misconduct and Resulting Harm Borrower : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA ) Program : XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Certificate ) Enrollment Period : Approximately XXXX I enrolled at XXXX XXXX based on representations made by admissions representatives and school marketing materials regarding job placement prospects, employer relationships, program accreditation, and eligibility for employment and licensure in my field of study. These representations were material to my decision to enroll and to take out private student loans. 

At the time of enrollment, I was a working spouse of an XXXX military service member. I was specifically targeted with assurances that the program would lead quickly to employment, that employers recognized the credential, and that the school provided meaningful career placement assistance. I relied on these statements when enrolling and assuming debt. 

After enrollment, it became apparent that these representations were misleading. Job placement assistance was minimal or nonexistent, employer recognition was not as represented, and the credential did not provide the employment outcomes promised. The value of the program was materially different from what was represented at the time of enrollment. 

XXXX XXXX has since become defunct, and its parent entities have been subject to well-documented government enforcement actions related to deceptive practices. Because the school closed many years ago and this loan originated in XXXX, I no longer have access to contemporaneous marketing materials, admissions emails, or accreditation disclosures that the school controlled and failed to preserve. 

It is unreasonable to require a borrower to produce decades-old documents from a closed for-profit institution as a condition of relief, particularly where the schools misconduct history is publicly documented and widely recognized. The absence of borrower-retained materials does not negate the misconduct or the harm caused. 

As a direct result of relying on XXXX misrepresentations , I incurred significant financial harm by assuming student loan debt for a credential that did not provide the promised value or employment outcomes. I continue to carry this financial burden long after the school ceased operations. 

I respectfully request that my loan be evaluated in light of the schools documented misconduct, the age of the loan, the closure of the institution, and the unavailability of records that were solely within the schools control. 

I certify that the statements above are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. 

The servicers denial relies on evidentiary standards that are unreasonable and unattainable given the age of the loan ( originated in XXXX  ) and the closure of the school. The borrower can not reasonably be expected to produce contemporaneous marketing materials, admissions communications, or accreditation disclosures from a defunct for-profit institution more than a decade later. The servicers refusal to consider publicly available enforcement actions, accreditation findings, and the known misconduct history of XXXX XXXX effectively denies relief to an entire class of borrowers harmed by closed schools.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation