Student-loan defaulters can lose their professional licenses in some states: America's 21st century equivalent of debtors' prisons

Americans may think the days of debtors’ prisons are over--those dark, dank jails where English magistrates tossed delinquent debtors in the 18th century. Read Charles Dickens' Pickwick Papers or Patrick O'Brian's Reverse of the Medal if you want the details.

But 21st century America is pretty damn close to 18th century England. Our government doesn't throw student-loan defaulters in debtors’ prison; but in 19 states, government agencies can seize professional licenses held by people who default on their student loans. According to the New York Times, lawyers, nurses, barbers, real estate agents, and psychologists have all had their licenses suspended or revoked because they defaulted on their college loans.

Millions of Americans have been beguiled by the promise of a bright future if only they get a college education. Perhaps they saw a for-profit college's advertisement on the subway--an advertisement depicting happy and prosperous individuals who got good jobs because they got a college degree.

And so they enroll. But they have to to take out student loans to pay for tuition and fees, and semester after semester their debt grows larger. And when they graduate (or drop out in discouragement) they often don't find good jobs.

Then, when these hapless student debtors are unable to make their monthly loan payments, the government's student-loan servicers cheerfully allow borrowers to defer their payment obligations while interest continues to accrue.

At some point, borrowers realize that they owe twice what they borrowed--even three times or four times what they borrowed. At that point their student loans are impossible to repay.

Then, when these unfortunate debtors default on their college loans, a cascade of misery showers down on them. The federal government garnishes their pay checks, seizes their income-tax refunds, and (for the elderly) even gobbles up a portion of their Social Security checks.

And--on top of all this--some states even seize defaulters' professional licenses, making it impossible for them to earn a living!

What have we become as a nation that we allow our most vulnerable young Americans (and some older Americans) to be scammed by the old canard that postsecondary education is the ticket to the middle class?

Let's see if one or two of the so-called progressives who seek the presidency will put license-suspension on their campaign agenda. Surely there is enough good will in Congress to pass federal legislation that prohibits the states from seizing people's professional licenses simply because they can't pay back their student loans.

And if Congress can't get that done, let's stop referring to our country as the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave. Because in fact, our nation treats student-loan debtors much like England treated delinquent debtors in the 18th century.

References

Jessica Silver-Greenberg, Stacy Cowley and Natalie Kitroeff. When Unpaid Student Loan bills Mean You Can No Longer Work. New York Times, November 17, 2017.

Sued Because You Defaulted On a Private Student Loan? Read Richard Gaudreau's blog in Huffington Post about National Collegiate Student Loan Trust

If you defaulted on a private student loan and got sued, you should read Richard Gaudreau's recent blog essay in the Huffington Post.

As Gaudreau explained, there are big differences between federal student loans and private loans. The federal student-loan program offers alternative repayment plans that lower monthly payments for borrowers who run into financial trouble.  In addition, the Department of Education offers loan forgiveness for people who borrowed to attend an institution that closed while they were enrolled and for people who were defrauded by the institution they attended.

Private student loans offer none of these protections, and private creditors have responded heartlessly toward their defaulted student-loan debtors. In many instances, private lenders have turned over their defaulted student loans to collection agencies. In particular, National Collegiate Student Loan Trust (NCT), a debt collector with a deceptively benign name, has filed law suits against numerous student-loan debtors, as many as one a day in some states, according to a Bloomberg Business Week article.

In some cases, however, NCT has not been able to show that it is the real party in interest in those lawsuits. In other words, NCT cannot always produce the paperwork that demonstrates it has the authority to collect the loan.

In such cases, some debtors have been able to persuade judges to dismiss these collection suits. So if you have been sued because you defaulted on a private student loan, your lawyer should demand that the debt collect produce evidence that it has the right to sue you for your student-loan debt.

Why would a debt collector sue someone without being  able to show it has the authority to collect on the debt? I am not certain, but here is my best guess. I think private banks and lenders (Wells Fargo, Sallie Mae and some other prominent names) have bundled thousands of basically noncollectable student loans and sold them to debt collectors like NCT, without providing the debt buyers with all the necessary legal documents for the individual loans. The debt collectors may have bought these loans for pennies on the dollar.

The debt collectors then sue distressed borrowers, betting the borrower are too unsophisticated to know how to find out whether the debt collector has the legal authority to collect the debt. .

In most instances, it is a safe bet. Distressed student-loan debtors usually do not have enough money to hire lawyers to defend their interests. In some cases, they naively admit to damaging "Requests for Admissions" that the creditors send them in the mail. By doing so, debtors give up their legal rights without knowing it.

In essence, private student-loan debt collectors maybe engaging in the contemporary equivalent of the "robo-signing" scandal that occurred during the home-mortgage crisis of 2008. A lot of home owners lost their homes in foreclosure actions even though the agencies that confiscated their houses sometimes couldn't prove they had the legal authority to sue the homeowner in the first place.

So if you have been sued by NCT or another student-loan debt collector, read Gaudreau's article and then hire a lawyer. The first thing your attorney will probably do is demand that the debt collector produce the evidence that is has the authority to sue you. If it can't produce that evidence, it shouldn't have sued you, and you have a good chance of getting your case dismissed.

Justice! Wouldn't it be nice to see a little of it come your way?


References

Richard Gaudreau. In Spate of National Collegiate Student Loan Trust Lawsuits One Defense Stands Out. Huffington Post, April 25, 2016.  Available at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-04/the-student-debt-collection-mess

Jamie P. Hopkins & Katherine A. Pustizzi. A Blast From the Past: Are the Robo-Signing Issues That Plagued the Mortgage Crisis Set to Engulf the Student Loan Industry? 45 University of Toledo Law Review 239 (Winter 2014). Available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2413848

Natalie Kitroeff. The Lawsuit Machine Going After Student Debtors: "This is robosigning 2.0". BloombergBusinessweek.com, June 3, 2015. Available at
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-04/the-student-debt-collection-mess

Gloria J. Liddell & Pearson Liddell, Jr. Robo Signers: The Legal Quagmire of Invalid Residential Foreclosure Proceedings and the Resultant Potential Impact on Stakeholders. 16 Chapman Law Review 367 (Winter 2013).

Old and in the Way: Hundreds of thousands of elderly student-loan debtors are experiencing real financial hardship, and the federal government doesn't care

Old and in the way, that's what I heard them say

They used to heed the words he said, but that was yesterday

Gold will turn to gray and youth will fade away

They'll never care about you, call you old and in the way

Old and In the Way

Lyrics and music by David Grisman

Many Americans think student-loan defaulters are young scofflaws who obtained valuable university degrees and simply refuse to pay back their loans.

But that stereotype could not be further from the truth.

In fact, most of the people who defaulted on their student loans simply fell on hard times. Many acquired their degrees from for-profit universities that charged far too much for substandard educational experiences. Millions of people who attended for-profit colleges found themselves worse off financially after finishing their studies than they were before they enrolled in these sleazy institutions.

Some people borrowed money to obtain undergraduate degrees and were unable to find jobs that paid well enough for them to service their loans. Some of these unfortunate souls doubled down and borrowed more money to go to graduate school.  Those who borrowed to go to law school found a collapsing job market for lawyers.

Other  student-loan borrowers became ill, got divorced or were laid off from their jobs. For a thousand different reasons, millions of student-loan debtors fell off the ladder in their climb toward economic security and never recovered. In short, most people who defaulted on their student loans simply did not have the financial resources to make their loan payments.

And many student-loan defaulters are elderly.

As Natalie Kitroeff reported recently in Bloomburg Business Week, about one out of four student-loan debtors age 65 and older are in default. Half the student loans held by people who are 75 years old or older are in default.  And 155,000 elderly Americans are having their Social Security checks garnished due to defaulted student loans, an enormous increase from 2002, when only 31,000 Americans were having their Social Security checks garnished.

Surely all humane people can agree that the federal government should not be garnishing elderly people's Social Security checks to collect on defaulted student loans. Or perhaps we can't. In the Lockhart decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the government's authority to garnish the Social Security checks of student-loan defaulters. And get this: The decision was unanimous. There were no liberals on the Supreme Court on the day the Lockhart case was decided.

But perhaps humane people can at least agree that the government should not oppose bankruptcy relief for student-loan defaulters who are living on Social Security income of less than $800 a month. But again, perhaps we can't. Educational Credit Management Corporation actually opposed bankruptcy relief for Jane Roth, a 68-year-old woman with chronic health problems who was living on a monthly Social Security check of only$774.

Fortunately, the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel was considerably more compassionate than ECMC, and it discharged Roth's student loan debt.

I once thought the Roth decision might bring the federal government to its senses and that it would issue strict orders against opposing bankruptcy relief for student-loan defaulters living entirely off their Social Security checks. But I was wrong.

In fact the Obama administration is ignoring the Roth decision. The Department of Education issued a guidance letter in July 2015 (the Mahaffie letter) outlining when student-loan creditors should not oppose bankruptcy relief for insolvent college-loan borrowers; and it did not even mention the Roth decision.  And the Department of Education's lawyers filed a pleading in a California bankruptcy court last month arguing that the Roth decision is not binding on any bankruptcy court.

For all its blah-blah-blah about providing relief for distressed student-loan debtors, the Obama administration's Department of Education is doing little more than pitching long-term repayment plans whereby student-loan borrowers are forced to make loan payments for 20 or 25 years.

And DOE's lawyers run like hounds to the bankruptcy courts to oppose bankruptcy discharge for insolvent student loan debtors, regardless of their age.

In short, if you are an elderly person who defaulted on your student loans you have no friends in the Obama administration. As far as the President Obama's Department of Education is concerned, you are just old and in the way.


References

Natalie Kitroeff. Student Debt May Be the Next Crisis Facing Elderly Americans. Bloomberg Businessweek, December 18, 2015.  Accessible at:  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-18/student-debt-may-be-the-next-crisis-facing-elderly-americans

Lockhart v. United States, 546 U.S. 142 (2005).

Lynn Mahaffie, Undue Hardship Discharge of Title IV Loans in Bankruptcy Adversary Proceedings. CL ID: GEN 15-13, July 7, 2015. Accessible at: https://ifap.ed.gov/dpcletters/attachments/GEN1513.pdf

U.S. General Accounting Office. Older Americans: Inability to Repay Student Loans May Affect Financial Security of a Small Percentage of Borrowers. GAO-14-866T. Washington, DC: General Accounting Office. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-866T

U.S. Department of Education. Strengthening the Student Loan System to Better Protect All Borrowers.  Washington, D.C., October 1, 2015: Author. Accessible: http://www2.ed.gov/documents/press-releases/strengthening-student-loan-system.pdf

All Student Loan Debtors Should Read Natalie Kitroeff's Recent Online Article in BloombergBusiness.Com

Every distressed student-loan debtor should read Natalie Kitroeff's recent article in BloombergBusiness.com about Murphy v. U.S. Department of Education and Educational Credit Management Corporation, now pending before the First Circuit Court of Appeals.  And any student-loan debtor who is trying to discharge a student loan in bankruptcy should read the amicus brief filed in that case by the National Consumer Law Center and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

The essence of the Murphy case can be summarized in a few words. Robert Murphy took out federal PLUS loans (student loans taken out by parents to pay their children's college costs), but he lost his job as the president of a manufacturing firm.  He's been unemployed for 13 years--too old, he says, to find comparable employment and overqualified for lower-paying jobs in his field.

Today, Murphy is 65 years old, and his total student-loan indebtedness has grown to almost a quarter of a million dollars due to accumulated interest. He and his wife are living on an income of $15,000 a year, which his wife earns working as a teachers aide.

Murphy filed for bankruptcy, seeking relief from his PLUS loans, but a bankruptcy court refused to discharge the debt. Like so many debtors who try to shed their student loans in bankruptcy, Murphy is acting as his own attorney.  His case is now on appeal before the First Circuit.

Murphy hopes to persuade the First Circuit to abandon the harsh Brunner test for determining when it would be an "undue hardship" for insolvent debtors to be forced to repay their student loans. That test requires debtors to show that they cannot repay their student loans and maintain a minimal standard of living, that their financial circumstances aren't likely to change soon, and that they made good faith efforts to repay their loans.

In the Ninth Circuit BAP Court's Roth decision, Judge Pappas filed a concurring opinion arguing that the Brunner test no longer makes sense. He pointed out that the Brunner test was devised at a time when student-loan debtors could discharge their student loans without restriction after a relatively short period of time--after five or seven years.

Today, Judge Pappas explained, student-loan debtors hold a trillion dollars in outstanding student-loan debt. And Congress amended the Bankruptcy Code so that insolvent debtors must prove "undue hardship" no matter when they file for bankruptcy, even if it is decades after the loans were taken out.

John Rao, attorney for the National Consumer Law Center, filed a brilliant amicus brief in support of Murphy, arguing that the Brunner test should be overturned. Rafael Pardo, a nationally renowned legal scholar from Emory Law School, also filed an amicus brief in support of Murphy's position.

If the First Circuit rules in Murphy's favor, bankruptcy might become a viable option for millions of distressed student-loan debtors. And if that happens, the world will turn upside down for the federal government, the federal student-loan program, and the colleges and universities that have feasted off of student-aid money without regard to whether their students could pay off their student loans.

Kitroeff's article pointed out that total outstanding indebtedness has doubled in just seven years. At the current rate of growth, total indebtedness will double again within 10 years, ballooning to well over two trillion dollars.

Let's all say a prayer for Robert Murphy and the two amicus attorneys who came to his aid: John Rao and Rafael Pardo. Ten million people are now delinquent on their student loans or are in default, and nine million more hold deferments or forbearances that temporarily excuse them from making payments.  Almost 4 million people are making payments under income-based repayment plans, which means total indebtedess for most of them is going up, not down, because their loan payments don't cover accruing interest.

This situation can't go on forever, and Robert Murphy may be the guy that ushers in relief for millions of fellow sufferers.  If you are a student-loan debtor in bankruptcy, you must read the amicus briefs in the Murphy case and get the arguments made in those briefs before your bankruptcy judge. Mr. Murphy, Mr. Rao, and Mr. Pardo are on the side of the angels, and I think their arguments will be persuasive to many bankruptcy judges around the United States regardless of what the First Circuit does.

References

Amicus Brief filed by National Consumer Law Center and National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys in Support of Appellant (Robert Murphy) in Murphy v. U.S. Department of Education & Educational Credit Management Corporation. (Written by John Rao, esq.) Accessible at: https://www.nclc.org/images/pdf/bankruptcy/brief-murphy-1st-cir-amicus.pdf

Amicus Brief filed by Rafael Pardo, arguing for reversal of District Court's decision in Murphy v. U.S. Department of education and Educational Credit Management Corporation. Accessible at: http://www.businessweek.com/pdfs/murphy-pardo-brief.pdf

Natalie Kitroeff. This Court Case Could Unshackle Americans From Student Debt. BloombergBusiness.com, October 8, 2015. Accessible at:  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-08/this-court-case-could-unshackle-americans-from-student-debt

Reflections on Gretchen Morgenson's Recent New York Times Column on Student-Loan Processing Companies

Gretchen Morgenson is the New York Times' best columnist. Week after week, she writes with clarity and precision about the shady dealings of our nation's financial industry.  In fact, in some issues, Morgenson's column is the only writer worth reading in the Sunday Times.

Thus, I was pleased when I opened the Business Section of yesterday's Sunday Times and saw Morgenson's column on the student-loan servicing industry. As she pointed out, the U.S.  government pays 11 companies a total of $600 million a year to service millions of student loans. And these companies are doing a terrible job.

A recent report by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which Morgenson summarized, analyzed numerous complaints by student-loan borrowers. The loan servicing companies are giving out misinformation, failing to record loan payments properly, and failing to tell borrowers about payment options that might help them stay out of default.

In short, it's a mess. I hope Ms. Morgenson digs deeper into the activities of the loan servicing companies.  Here are some questions I have: Who are the senior executives of these companies: Navient, Discover Bank, Great Lakes, and the rest? What is the annual compensation of the fat cats who run the companies  that are mishandling the loan-collection process?  Are these companies making campaign contributions to key federal legislators? If so, which Congresspeople are getting the money, and how much?

And I would really like Ms. Morgenson to turn her attention to Educational Credit Management Corporation, the most prominent company that opposes bankruptcy relief for student-loan debtors. The Times recently published a story about ECMC's ruthless tactics in the bankruptcy courts,  and it ran another story about ECMC's tactics in the Roth case, involving an elderly woman with chronic health problems who was living on Social Security checks of less than $800 a month.

How much does ECMC's CEO make? We know that former CEO Richard Boyle made $1.1 million in 2010. What is the current CEO's annual compensation to run a company that hounds oppressed student-loan debtors? And to whom is ECMC making campaign contributions?

A lot of good investigative reporting needs to be done about the student-loan industry. And Gretchen Morgenson is probably the best person to do it. Go for it, Gretchen!

References

Tara Siegel Bernard. Judges Rebuke Limits On Wiping Out Student Loan Debt. New York Times, July 17, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/18/your-money/student-loans/judges-rebuke-limits-on-wiping-out-student-loan-debt.html

Natalie Kitroeff. Loan Monitor Is Accused of Ruthless Tactics on Student Debt. New York Times, January 1, 2014.  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/us/loan-monitor-is-accused-of-ruthless-tactics-on-student-debt.html

Gretchen Morgenson. A Student Loan System Stacked Against the Borrower. New York Times, October 9, 2015. Accessible at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/business/a-student-loan-system-stacked-against-the-borrower.html

John Hechinger. Taxpayers Fund $454,000 Pay for Collector Chasing Student Loans. Bloomberg.com, May 15, 2013. Accessible at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-15/taxpayers-fund-454-000-pay-for-collector-chasing-student-loans.html