Date Received: 2018-01-20T00:00:00
Product: Federal student loan servicing
Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer
Consumer Consent Provided to Share Complaint: Consent provided
Consumer Complaint: I submitted information the Nelnet XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX group to have a student loan debt forgiven. I was told I needed to send in additional documentation for the account. I sent this additional informaiton via fax & have the confirmation sheet, as of XX/XX/XXXX. I was advised that I needed additional information to be considered for the program and provided such information on XX/XX/XXXX via fax and also have the confirmation sheet.
A ; ; that was requested before this current status update on XX/XX/XXXX, was a BPQY, which was also mentioned on the initial application form already submitted on XX/XX/XXXX.
As of XX/XX/XXXX, ALL information requested was already submitted and has been verified as submitted to Nelnet, by Nelnet representatives. However, in the status update about the acceptance of documents or the declination of such documents received on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX around XXXX, I was given written correspondence that states the representatives declined my information given and mention the reason for the declination was because of the following : ” You applied for discharge on the basis of a determination of XXXX by the Social Security Administration ( SSA ), but you did not provide the required documentation from the SSA supporting your eligibility for XXXX discharge and have not responded to our request to provide the documentation ; specifically, you did not provide a copy of your SSA notice of award for Social Security XXXX Insurance ( XXXX ) or Supplemental Security Income ( SSI ) benefits stating that your next scheduled XXXX review will be within 5 to 7 years ” I contacted the customer service team at Nelnet around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX regarding the letter I received. I mentioned two issues to the representative to attempt to resolve them. The first matter regarded how my name was addressed in their system & not matching up to my person according to security and my certificate of live birth, nor how my name was entered on the application. This created a conflict of interest as the company addressed a, ” XXXX XXXX ” not ” XXXX XXXX XXXX ” at the same address, however this error is addressed to another entity & was creating a conflict of interest in terms of lawfully opening mail and not lawfully opening mail. After mentioning this, I proceed to the next matter which was the above mentioned reason for the declination and my already providing the documentation requested. The representative was extremely helpful, however the solution given was that I was declined because I did not have on my medical review exactly, ” 5 to 7 years ” for a review cycle. I advised that regardless of what the information stated, the requested documentation was already sent in and has been recognized by the group. The group is reading the document sent to them on XX/XX/XXXX, the same BPQY document that I was given instruction to get from the SSA office originally to proceed with the request. The representative further stated that I could visit a doctor to have them verify if the severity of the XXXX was sufficient and would be something they would signoff on in writing, then I could have something to see if I could be approved for the program. I requested to speak to someone that would be able to give me more information about what the ” specific declination code meant ”. I was sent to a supervisor who verified security and the reason for the call, yet she repeated the same thing. I advised I would not be paying XXXX XXXX anything and to avoid being vulgar the matter was entirely ( verbatim ), ” XXXX ”. I further stated that I already sent the documents and that I would not be going to the SSA office and attempting to have them give me ANY documents that required me to do Nelnets job of verifying the coding on the paperwork I or anyone else sends to them. I further asked to get information from them regarding the legal contact about matters like this. The representative stated that the route I was seeking to go would not get the results I was seeking and that the paperwork requested needed to have, ” 5 to7 years ” on it to be considered for the program and the only reason I was not, because it said, ” XX/XX/XXXX & Q+ ”. She further stated that according to the SSA handbook that that status meant that my XXXX was thought to be able to improve within a certain time frame. I further stated that I appreciated her attempting to explain this to me, but I already provided the necessary documents and I would still like to reach out to someone about the matter as it would get heard and forwarded to the right individuals, whether she directly did the forwarding or not, it would get addressed. She provided the following information : ” nelnet attn corresponce XXXX XXXX XXXX nb XXXX ” I thanked her for her time and proceeded to gather the documents I accumulated to get them to try to get the application to them and its supporting documents.
Company: NELNET, INC.
State/Zip: MO 631XX
Company Response to Complaint: Closed with explanation
Was Company Response Timely: Yes
Did Consumer Dispute Company Response: N/A
Complaint ID: 2789174
The above data is from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Keep in mind that every company will get a complaint from time-to-time, even the great ones. But there are a few key data points that will give you an idea about how well the company values their customers and handles consumer issues.
Look at the item Company Response to Complaint: and Did Consumer Dispute Company Response: to get a better idea of how this was resolved. And the field Consumer Complaint: can give you some context of the issue.
In particular what you are looking for was that the company response was timely and that the consumer did not dispute it. The posting of complaints has proven to be a valuable resource for both companies and consumers.