CFPB Complaint

HEARTLAND PAYMENT SYSTEMS INC – CFPB Complaint

Consumer Complaint Submission

Date Received: 2018-10-24T00:00:00.000

Product: Federal student loan servicing

Issue: Dealing with your lender or servicer

Consumer Consent Provided to Share Complaint: Consent provided

Consumer Complaint: Over the last several months, I have had unnecessary difficulty in getting the loan servicer XXXX XXXXXXXX to process the in-school deferment to which I am entitled.

XXXX XXXX took over servicing of my Federal Perkins Loans from XXXX XXXX University and XXXX XXXX University sometime in XXXX. Initially, their communication regarding the details of my loans was very poor, but requests to customer service to link my two accounts were eventually successful.

Subsequently, I applied for an in-school deferment, to which I am entitled because I am enrolled full time in a degree granting program. On XX/XX/XXXX, I made an initial submission of my federally approved and school verified deferment paperwork and requested that my status be applied to both loans under my name, which the company refused, instead applying my in school status only to one loan, that originated by XXXX XXXX University ( XXXX ), and then requested a resubmission of the paperwork for the second loan, originated by XXXXXXXX XXXX University ( XXXX ).

Despite the undue burden to submit separate requests, I acquiesced and submitted the very same paperwork for application to my XXXX Perkins Loan on XX/XX/XXXX. I wrote to customer service on XX/XX/XXXX to inquire about the status of the in-school deferment request and was informed that no paperwork had been received despite the fact that I had confirmation that my fax was sent. While speaking with a customer service representative through an online chat interface, I again faxed the deferment paperwork. The first time the representative told me that the paperwork was illegible. I sent the paperwork a second time and the representative informed me that I had not filled out the form correctly, despite the fact that the very same paperwork had been approved for the loan originated by XXXX. The representative proceeded to issue contradictory statements regarding the accuracy and completeness of my form based on the fact that an optional field for the correction of address information already printed on the form was not completed. Despite informing them that this field was optional and only required if information had changed, which it had not, the representative refused to accept the form. I therefore added the technically unnecessary information and resent the form for a third time. The representative then informed me that the form was received and was accurate and will be processed in 7-10 days.

READ  ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC. - CFPB Complaint

I then proceeded to inquire about the period for which the in-school deferment would be applied, given that my form indicates my in-school status for XXXX XXXX ( XXXX-XX/XX/XXXX ) term and the XXXX-XXXX academic year ( XXXX XXXX-XXXX XXXX ). The representative informed me that I will have to reapply each term with two separate forms, one for each loan. This is an undue burden on the loan holder, as one form is adequate to discern the enrollment status to be applied to both loans serviced by the same company.

Further, in applying the in-school deferment status to my loan from XXXX, XXXX XXXX did not accurately translate my deferment information from the previous servicer, XXXX XXXX XXXX. This resulted in me having to make a payment of {$40.00} plus a {$1.00} service fee, as opposed to having my in-school status correctly applied, which would have resulted in no payment because I have continuously been enrolled full time since XXXX.

I also requested to know why the info page for the account holder does not list the actual date of the current status of the loan. The representative informed me that the due date is the end of the status date, but this information is not accurate and complete at all times, so it can not be trusted.

Throughout my exchanges with XXXX XXXX representatives, I have gotten the distinct impression that their answers are unnecessarily obfuscatory and that they have made the most basic functions of loan servicing unnecessarily difficult.

Finally, unlike nearly all major servicers, XXXX XXXX refuses to receive forms digitally. This adds to the difficulty in processing in-school deferments.

Company: HEARTLAND PAYMENT SYSTEMS INC

State/Zip:

Company Response to Complaint: Closed with explanation

Was Company Response Timely: Yes

Did Consumer Dispute Company Response: N/A

Complaint ID: 3055791

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.

READ  ERC - CFPB Complaint

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.




About the author

Research Department

Here is where you will find important stories located from around the web which can impact you and your financial life.

Scroll to Top
%d bloggers like this: