Consumer complaint received 2026-05-07 00:00:00
Product: Student loan — Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer — Trouble with how payments are being handled
Company: Nelnet, Inc.
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint regarding Sloan Servicings failure to properly process my Income-Based Repayment recertification despite my timely compliance with all document requests and direct confirmation from a Sloan representative that my application was complete. -- On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted my IBR recertification application and tax documents. -- On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email from Sloan Servicing requesting a prior tax document that included my name, Social Security Number and Sloan account number written on each page. That same day, I promptly uploaded the updated documents exactly as instructed. -- On XX/XX/XXXX, I called Sloan Servicing to confirm that the updated documents satisfied their requirements. During that call, the Sloan representative specifically confirmed that they had everything needed to process my IBR recertification and stated that nothing else is required. The representative also calculated and discussed my anticipated new payment amount under IBR. Based on these representations, I reasonably believed my IBR recertification had been successfully completed and was being processed appropriately. -- However, the next communication I received from Sloan Servicing was dated XX/XX/XXXX, informing me that my IBR had expired. Sloan then placed me into the Standard Repayment Plan with a monthly payment of {$1100.00} beginning XX/XX/XXXX. Additionally, Sloan capitalized {$8600.00} in accrued interest as a direct result of their failure to properly process my recertification despite my timely compliance and their explicit confirmation that no further action was required from me. -- On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Sloan Servicing and explained that I had been explicitly told my documents were sufficient and therefore had no reason to believe my IBR recertification would expire. During that call, I was informed that additional pages from my tax document were allegedly needed. I uploaded those documents while still on the phone with the representative. A complaint was then escalated to higher management for review of my case about retroactively applying the IBR payment amount for XXXX as well as reversal of interest capitalization. -- On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from Sloan Servicing with my new IBR payment amount, which is scheduled to begin XX/XX/XXXX. This confirms that I was in fact eligible for continued IBR and that the issue stemmed from Sloan Servicings handling and processing of my recertification documentation. -- On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Sloan Servicing again because the Standard Repayment amount of {$1100.00} was still showing due for XX/XX/XXXX. I also requested an update regarding the complaint previously submitted to higher management. An account specialist later returned my call and stated that Sloan Servicing would not retroactively apply my approved IBR payment amount and would not reverse the {$8600.00} interest capitalization, despite the fact that I timely submitted all requested documentation and relied on Sloans explicit assurances that nothing further was required from me. No explanation was provided for why these corrections could not be made, despite the servicing error originating with Sloan. Instead, Sloan Servicing placed my account into a one-month hardship forbearance for XX/XX/XXXX. This action creates additional financial harm because interest will continue accruing and may further capitalize as a result of a situation caused entirely by Sloan Servicings failure to properly process my recertification. I fulfilled all requested requirements on time and relied on Sloan Servicings representatives that my documentation was complete. Sloan Servicing ultimately approved my IBR application, further confirming that the issue was not borrower ineligibility, but rather Sloans mishandling and delayed processing of my recertification.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation