Slashdot Mirror
$12 Billion In Private Student Loan Debt May Be Wiped Away By Missing Paperwork (nytimes.com)
New submitter cdreimer shares a report from The New York Times (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternate source): Tens of thousands of people who took out private loans to pay for college but have not been able to keep up payments may get their debts wiped away because critical paperwork is missing. The troubled loans, which total at least $5 billion, are at the center of a protracted legal dispute between the student borrowers and a group of creditors who have aggressively pursued them in court after they fell behind on payments. Judges have already dismissed dozens of lawsuits against former students, essentially wiping out their debt, because documents proving who owns the loans are missing. A review of court records by The New York Times shows that many other collection cases are deeply flawed, with incomplete ownership records and mass-produced documentation. Some of the problems playing out now in the $108 billion private student loan market are reminiscent of those that arose from the subprime mortgage crisis a decade ago, when billions of dollars in subprime mortgage loans were ruled uncollectable by courts because of missing or fake documentation. And like those troubled mortgages, private student loans -- which come with higher interest rates and fewer consumer protections than federal loans -- are often targeted at the most vulnerable borrowers, like those attending for-profit schools.
At the center of the storm is one of the nation's largest owners of private student loans, the National Collegiate Student Loan Trusts. It is struggling to prove in court that it has the legal paperwork showing ownership of its loans, which were originally made by banks and then sold to investors. National Collegiate is an umbrella name for 15 trusts that hold 800,000 private student loans, totaling $12 billion. More than $5 billion of that debt is in default, according to court filings.
At the center of the storm is one of the nation's largest owners of private student loans, the National Collegiate Student Loan Trusts. It is struggling to prove in court that it has the legal paperwork showing ownership of its loans, which were originally made by banks and then sold to investors. National Collegiate is an umbrella name for 15 trusts that hold 800,000 private student loans, totaling $12 billion. More than $5 billion of that debt is in default, according to court filings.
It's not bullshit. Any creditor has to be able to prove that you owe them money. it doesn't require a "special kit". It just requires standing up for yourself.
Don't trust a bill just because someone sent it to you. It could be a billing error or blatant fraud. Scam artists send out small medical bills betting on the mark being diligent enough to pay their bills but not anal enough to track everything they do.
Hospitals screw up bills more often than not.
A whole batch of mortgages were nullified in Texas because the proper paperwork was never filed with the relevant government body. The Yankee corporation in question thought they didn't have to bother. Didn't go over will with the Texas judge in question.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I love how we always talk about personal responsibility and corporate responsibility, but it's always the little guy that gets hit by it. Why is it the borrowers ethical responsibility to pay the loan back, but not the owner of the loan's responsibility to actually track what people owe them? Seems to me that ethically, if you can't prove someone owes you something, then they don't owe you jack.
In the article, it clearly states that like the mortgage boom, student lending also suffered from the same lax paperwork that plagued some mortgages. Invest companies were in such a hurry to buy loans that they didn't keep up with the paperwork or good record keeping. In a few cases mentioned in the article it's not just a matter of the person getting off free; the bad records meant the borrower trying to levy penalties for loans that the borrower never made. So then the lender has to prove that they own any of the loans but they can't prove it.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
"deeply flawed" documentation.
I really wonder about that. I had difficulty getting a job after college, and like a lot of others my student loan went into collection. Two years after graduation, in another state, I landed a well paying job, contacted the collection agency through an old notice and made payments, eventually paying it off.
And then, about a year later, I got contacted by a collection agency (the same or a different, I don't know -- didn't keep track) that I still owed $500-something on my student loan. I was doing well at the time, so I paid it off again just to make it all go away.
Three years later, I moved to a different state and got a new job, and a collection agency *again* contacted me about my student loan, saying I still owed a little over $200. I argued vehemently that I had already paid off the damn thing twice. They got really rude over the next few weeks, called work and home at all hours, and being nasty to whomever answered. I swallowed my pride and paid it off for a third time.
That was a couple decades ago, and I haven't gotten any calls since. But here's the punchline. My most recent job required that I provide evidence of my degree. I'd never been asked this before, and looking through all my decades-old paperwork, some never opened through moves from one state to another to another, I couldn't find my diploma.
No problem, right? Contact the school, get a copy of the diploma, send it to HR.
The school had no record that I had ever attended.
Let that sink in for a moment.
So I went backwards from the student loan docs, which showed that I attended the school from year1 to year2. The school eventually had to admit that I had been a student there, but they had lost all records of that time. I got them to put that in a letter, which my work grudgingly accepted. Next time I'm not putting my education on my resume.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Well the reason people are more ready to put their trust in private businesses over the government is because if a business tries to screw you over, they have to answer to the government. In theory the government has to answer to another part of the government, but the government can screw you over much more easily than private business can. Would you rather take your bank to court over wrongful billing, or take the IRS to court over wrongful billing? In that matter, would you rather go to your local bank and talk to someone to get a billing error fixed, or find a way to work with the IRS to get a billing error fixed?
It's the responsibility of both. I'm a fiscal conservative and all for personal responsibility, but I have no sympathy for the lenders here. These were private loans. It was the personal responsibility of the lender to make sure the paperwork was in order and properly recorded before they loaned out the money (or paid to acquire the loan). If they fail to do that, well I guess their money wasn't really important to them in the first place.
Congrats to the borrowers - they got the equivalent to finding thousands or tens of thousands of dollars on the ground because the lender wasn't careful to make sure their pocket didn't have a hole in it.
Yes, the ethical thing for the borrower to do is to pay back the loan. But if there's no clear documentation for the loan, the borrower can't be sure they're paying back the right person. They could pay someone $10,000, then next day some other collector calls saying they're the actual owner of the loan and the borrower needs to come up with another $10,000 to pay them. Faced with this possibility, the most ethical thing a borrower can do is "pay back" the loan by putting it into a savings account. And when someone can prove that they're really the actual one who is owed the money, the borrower can transfer the account over to them (minus interest).
well I think that's the problem. They don't have the paper.
It's also not simply people lying to get out of loans, it's courts fed up with high pressure tactics to get payment on loans that were never made! Then when they are contested the loan companies dont' show up in court. It's the courts that are invaldating the loans for their own purposes not just because people are trying to weasle out
from the article:
“I tried to be honest,” Ms. Watson said of her court appearance. “I said, ‘Some of these loans I took out, and I’ll be responsible for them, but some I didn’t take.’”
In her defense, Ms. Watson’s lawyer seized upon what he saw as the flaws in National Collegiate’s paperwork. Judge Eddie McShan of New York City’s Civil Court in the Bronx agreed and dismissed four lawsuits against Ms. Watson. The trusts “failed to establish the chain of title” on Ms. Watson’s loans, he wrote in one ruling.
When the judge’s rulings wiped out $31,000 in debt, “it was such a relief,” Ms. Watson said. “You just feel this whole weight lifted. My mom started to cry.”
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Really, the borrower has no responsibility to track the loan, it's all on the lender?
Yes, it is all on the lender.
I make an agreement with you to pay you $1000 a month until my $100,000 debt is repaid. You sell that debt to someone else. You are responsible for making sure they have all the appropriate paperwork to take over that debt. If they sell it to someone else, they are responsible. And so on and so on and so on.
If whoever ends up with it can't prove that they are the person who is supposed to be receiving my payments, that's their fault or whoever sold them the debt--not mine. I'm not just going to pay someone who walks up and says, "Hey, you owe me money!" Once someone can prove that they are the person who is supposed to be receiving my payments, I will gladly make them.