Search News


Browse Archives

News

Rethinking Bankruptcy and Student Loans

September 24, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

WASHINGTON -- As Congress and the White House move to alter bankruptcy code to make it more equitable to consumers, a House subcommittee began a reconsideration Wednesday of how bankruptcy law treats private student loan debt.

Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law, held a hearing to initiate legislation reversing a 2005 change in federal bankruptcy law that, he said, gave private student loan lenders a “favorable, unusual” advantage over borrowers, as well as in comparison to the issuers of most other kinds of consumer loans. "Hopefully it’ll be bipartisan and if not, you know, we’ll just have to forge ahead and do what’s right.”

After the hearing, he formally announced plans to file legislation to “give private student loan borrowers more equitable treatment during the bankruptcy process.”

Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, hailed the drafting of new legislation as meeting “a growing need to protect students from financially riskier private student loans and predatory lending practices,” especially with rising college costs and an unemployment rate approaching 10 percent.

The subcommittee’s senior Republican, Rep. Trent Franks of Arizona, seemed receptive to some reform of the private student loan industry, but cautioned that if the bill passed last week “isn’t the death knell of private student lending, ending the favorable treatment student loans receive under bankruptcy code certainly could be.”

Bankruptcy law bars virtually all borrowers from discharging their private student loan debt, even as most other forms of consumer debt -- including auto loans, credit card debt and mortgages -- can be discharged through bankruptcy proceedings. The only exceptions are made in cases of “undue hardship.”

Though federally guaranteed student loans usually can’t be canceled in bankruptcy cases either, they do come with fixed interest rates, flexible payment plans and other consumer protections that generally make them less onerous for borrowers, said Lauren Asher, president of the Berkeley, Calif.-based Institute for College Access and Success. “Private student loans are one of the riskiest ways to pay for college,” she said, adding that the loans “are not financial aid any more than using a credit card to pay for tuition or books is financial aid.”

Even so, students are turning to the loans to make up the gap between federal student loans (which top out at $12,500 per academic year for independent undergraduates in the last two years of study) and the ever-rising costs of tuition and fees at American colleges and universities. According to calculations by Asher’s organization, two-thirds of all graduates of four-year colleges have student loans, averaging $23,200 in federal and private loans, and a third of students who earned a bachelor’s degree in 2007-8 took out a private student loan during their time in college. Fourteen percent of all U.S. undergraduates took out a private student loan in that academic year, up from 4 percent in 2003-4.

Rep. Danny Davis (D-Ill.) testified at the hearing on behalf of the Congressional Black Caucus’s Community Reinvestment Task Force, which he co-chairs, and expressed particular concern for African-American students who, he said, “were statistically more likely to borrow private student loans,” at a rate of 17 percent.

Last year, as the House voted to reauthorize the Higher Education Act, Davis proposed an amendment that would have allowed borrowers filing for bankruptcy to discharge their private student loans as part of that process, so long as the loan had required repayment for at least five years. The measure failed in a 236 to 179 vote. Cohen’s bill will probably be modeled after Davis’s amendment.

Facing Bankruptcy

Over the course of earning a bachelor’s degree, a student at a particularly pricey institution receiving little or no grant aid could end up borrowing $100,000 or more in private loans, said Brett Weiss, a consumer bankruptcy lawyer who testified on behalf of the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys and the National Consumer Law Center. It’s “unfair,” he said, for other loans of that magnitude, like mortgages, to be forgiven in bankruptcy proceedings while student loans are not.

J. Douglas Cuthbertson, a lawyer who represents financial institutions in federal consumer financial litigation for the McLean, Va.-based law firm Miles & Stockbridge, warned of “debtors filing for bankruptcy almost solely on student loans,” as was sometimes the case before 1976, when Congress barred discharge of student loans within five years of college graduation. A 1990s change to bankruptcy code made the minimum seven years, and the 2005 code revision made it all but impossible to have student loan debt canceled.

Franks and Rep. Howard Coble (R-N.C.), the two only members of their party at the hearing, voiced support for Cuthbertson’s argument, the same one that has been used by Republicans whenever changes to bankruptcy law have been considered.

But Weiss cited a 1970s study by the Government Accountability Office that found that less than 1 percent of all matured student loans had been discharged in bankruptcy and dismissed Republican concerns about widespread manipulation of the bankruptcy code.

The notion that “people who view bankruptcy as an easy option … is so far from the reality, it’s just absolutely dead wrong,” he said. “Student loans are not primary factors for bankruptcy filings. Student loans are sort of in the mix.… People very, very rarely file for bankruptcy because of a student loan.”

Defining 'Undue Hardship'

The only chance borrowers have to discharge their private student loans during bankruptcy proceedings comes by being able to demonstrate “undue hardship,” a term that has not been concretely defined by Congress and is up for varied interpretations by bankruptcy judges.

Rafael I. Pardo, an associate professor at the Seattle University School of Law who has done extensive studies on student loans and their discharge in bankruptcy, called on Congress “to clarify the undue hardship standard.”

Courts generally go through long investigations to determine whether debtors have faced exceptional challenges, such as physical or mental disabilities, a lack of job skills or an absence of future earning potential. Final rulings are up to the discretion of judges, Asher of the Institute for College Access and Success said, and much more likely to happen with the benefit of “a high-priced attorney.”

All four experts who testified voiced support for Congress to create its own definition of “undue hardship,” which could be easily used to evaluate all bankruptcy cases involving student loans.

Democrats and Republicans on the subcommittee were all receptive to the formulation of a definition.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Rethinking Bankruptcy and Student Loans

  • Bordering on fiscal insanity
  • Posted by Jo on September 24, 2009 at 6:45am EDT
  • " .. cited a 1970s study by the Government Accountability Office that found that less than 1 percent of all matured student loans had been discharged in bankruptcy .."

    Gee .. does this 40-year-old "study" mean that fee-seeking bankruptcy lawyers (who always get paid first) are going to start co-signing student loan contracts? And take taxpayers off the hook?

    Sure. And pigs will fly. Hey -- check out this outstanding law student --

    "Finding $270,000 Student Debt a Bigger Hurdle Than Bar Exam"

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/business/02lawyer.html?_r=2&hp

    Only a year ago, Fannie/Freddie blew up in the taxpayers' faces, after Barney Frank said just a few months before that "everything is fine with Fannie and Freddie."

    Why should there be another financial debacle so soon? Someone want to justify that?

  • Hard Cases = Bad Law
  • Posted by CatoRenasci on September 24, 2009 at 9:15am EDT
  • Removing the abililty to discharge student loans through bankruptcy was a 1990s response to soaring default rates on student loans which reached more than 20% by the early 1990s. Clearly, the old system gave student borrowers little incentive to repay their loans and every incentive to default and declare bankruptcy as quickly as possible after finishing degrees. The amounts were lower than today, and the people most likely to game the system this way included the sophisticated who had borrowed large sums for graduate school - especially law, medicine and business schools.

    The response was a 'hard cases make bad law' example -- almost completely barring discharge after earlier attempts to lengthen the period before discharge apparently failed to stem the tide of defaults.

    Now, the loan repayment issue has become a social engineering tool, with loan forgiveness for taking certain kinds of jobs, and absolute debt for those who don't.

    A large part of the problem is the way in which default interest rates, collection fees, and the like can balloon an undischargeable debt. This is the source of most of the real horror stories about private student loan debt one hears.

    One reasonable solution would be make only the original principal of the debt nondischargeable, but make the interest (including capitalized interest) and any penalties above the actual, documented cost of collection (or have a fixed amount for collection no greater than 15% of the original principal) dischargeable in bankruptcy.

    The question then arises, "would anyone lend under those circumstances?" and I don't know the answer. I suspect the underwriting might get better.

  • Just A Little Bit Pregnant
  • Posted by Ed McKinley on September 24, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • While I applaud the efforts to recognize the predatory nature of private student loans, I resent the implication that federally guarenteed loans, that are subject to the same lack of any consumer protection, are some sort of panacea of fairness.
    Just ask any of the tens of thousands ( if not hundreds of thousands) of borrowers who are currently living under a cloud of financial ruin. Oh, but I get it. Sure federally guarenteed loans are predatory too, but they are "less" predatory, so that makes it 'OK."
    All of these loans are a do or die trying gamble. If federally guaranteed loans are so "default proof," then please explain the vast numbers of borrowers that have been forced into default.
    What is far more devastating is that once in default their are absolutely no incentives whatsoever for servicers or guarantors to work with borrowers in any reasonable way to put these loans back into good standing. Yes even federally guarenteed loans are subjected to unbelievable penalties and interest that cause the balances to quickly explode to 2,3 even 4 or more times their original value.
    Loan "rehabilitation" programs are a joke as they simply roll all that into a lifetime debt comittment that cripples most borrowers.
    You can't be just a little bit pregnant. Either you are or you are not. But, what the heck. My loans were not quite as predatory as those suffering the consequences of private loans so I guess I can just suck it up and take one for the team.
    I defaulted because early on because I was unable to pay. But when I became able to pay I found that wasn't good enough. If I could,t pay on a $38,000 loan after graduation what in God's name makes anyone think I can begin to resolve a $110,000 debt now. I've never asked for bankruptcy protection, simply the means to reach an agreement that might make it possible for me to some day repay the money I borrowed. Does anyone else see something wrong with this picture ? Retoring ALL consumer protections to ALL forms of student loan debt is the only realistic and fair way to begin to resolve long standing delinquent student loan debts and begin to bring soaring costs of college tuition and fees back under control. The ball is starting to roll, let's get it right this time.

  • Can't call the repo man
  • Posted by IHE Reader on September 24, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • Unlike houses, cars, boats, and other consumer items, educations cannot be re-possessed or liquidated in the course of a lender's trying to recover the money it lent. College degrees are fundamentally different from other consumer goods in that the repo man cannot come to collect them. College degrees can continue to be used even after bankruptcy. Any revision of bankruptcy law vis-a-vis student loans must have very strict hardship guidelines under which loans can be discharged. Discharging student loans for those spendthrifts who stupidly get themselves into too much consumer debt shouldn't be an option.

  • Posted by Julie on September 24, 2009 at 11:30am EDT
  • I recently became disabled and had both federal and private student loans. I was able to have my federal student loans forgiven due to total and permanent disability in a formal process outside of bankruptcy through the Department Of Education. However, my private student loans do not offer similar protections for those who become disabled. I was told my loans are in default and there is nothing that I can do to have them forgiven due to my disability. This is unfair and I hope basic consumer protections are enacted for private student loans. I realize that one option is to file for bankruptcy and then file an adversary proceeding claiming undue hardship to the court. However, I do not have the $ to do so as my only source of income is social security disability. PLEASE HELP!!!!

  • Posted by Whoa Jo on September 24, 2009 at 1:45pm EDT
  • Jo said, "Gee .. does this 40-year-old "study" mean that fee-seeking bankruptcy lawyers (who always get paid first) are going to start co-signing student loan contracts? And take taxpayers off the hook?"

    One: the change in bankruptcy rules are for PRIVATE loans, so taxpayers are not involved.

    Two: If you go back and read a bit more closely, you'll realize these rules were changed shortly thereafter. To wit, "[using bankruptcy to discharge student loans] was sometimes the case before 1976, when Congress barred discharge of student loans within five years of college graduation. A 1990s change to bankruptcy code made the minimum seven years, and the 2005 code revision made it all but impossible to have student loan debt canceled." Therefore, a 40-year-old study in appropriate, especially if the rules seem to have been changed based upon a bad interpretation of data.

    Three: is it YOUR money being wasted in this process? No. Just as it isn't your money being wasted by someone else's bad mortgage, overwhelming credit card debt, or repossessed car. Yes, it all gets factored in somewhere, but it always had. That's not the point. A personal desire to punish someone for their bad financial situation isn't good financial policy

    It's about fairness, balance, and accountability -- neither of which factored into the decisions that rescinded previously established rules and regulations on a fantastically predatory market. Tell me: in what other world would a $5000 loan, upon default, be able to balloon up to $20,000? That used to be called usury. Now, it's just standard operating procedure.

  • Just a minute ..
  • Posted by Jo on September 24, 2009 at 2:15pm EDT
  • "One: the change in bankruptcy rules are for PRIVATE loans, so taxpayers are not involved."

    Who are the lenders involved?

    Lenders in the GOVERNMENT-INSURED student loan market?

    Oh.

    Never mind?

    Bottom line: only use private lenders (1) as an absolute last resort and (2) you are going into Chicago politics with Blag-o and payback will be funded "honestly."

  • Posted by kgotthardt on September 24, 2009 at 3:30pm EDT
  • Ed McKinley is correct--federal loan borrowers are not protected, either.

    First, while students have more access to forbearance through claiming excessive debt, interest accrues, which makes no sense if the student has excessive debt.

    Second, the Department of Ed is inconsistent in its criteria used for discharges of all kinds, including for disability.

    Third, the Federal Government does not protect students from predatory schools.

    The idea that the Federal Government is looking out for students who borrow through its programs is laughable at best.

  • New clause in promissory notes
  • Posted by Repo Man on September 24, 2009 at 3:30pm EDT
  • Maybe frontal lobotomy should be added to the promissory note as a form of “collateral”?

    In all seriousness, the real point of this article and others like it is that college is not worth the price that many students are going into debt to pay for it.

    Who thinks that they can borrow $80,000 for bachelor's degree and that an average starting salary in any field is going to cover that along with other living expenses?

  • Student Loans
  • Posted by Lee , Adjunct Humanities at CCCs on September 24, 2009 at 5:15pm EDT
  • Federal student loans above $50,000.00 with or without accumulated interest could be a reasonable starting off point. Let all graduates and post-graduates who are out of school and have been struggling to pay AT LEAST $50,000 of student loans over five years from the time they left school be exempt from paying interest rates. I cannot understand why the Federal and State governments need to lend students money the way lenders lend money, if you get my gist. Clearly, I have no need to borrow from the agent to whom I pay taxes so I can benefit from my own money. Bottom line, folks, speaking of student loans, health care, and other federally funded programs--THAT'S OUT MONEY!!!! I won't default on my student loan, but I will need to live two life-times in order to pay it off (including what's left of this life-time, and I'm almost old enough to collect measly retirement earnings--AND THAT'S MY MONEY, TOO!!!! Bottom line, folks, IT'S ALL AND ALWAYS OUR MONEY!!!! I don't want to pay interest on student loans that come from my money in the first place--okay--yes, our money--but I have, in my lifetime paid enough taxes to benefit a lot of people who for some I seriously doubt they need our assistance as much as the feds et al say they do, and I'm stuck with an outrageous student loan because of interest rates. Get rid, please, of the interest--or--at least--reduce it to a much smaller percentage rate. Okay? And let's make sure, too THAT THE MONEY BEING REPAID AND THE INTEREST, IF ANY, BEING PAID IS APPLIED STRICTLY TO MONEY FOR STUDENTS WHO NEED MONEY IN ORDER TO GO TO COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY--Maybe more money into Pell Grants? Whose money is that "free" money? IT'S MINE AND YOURS FROM OUR TAXES. TAXES, TAXES, TAXES, and then some more taxes. Thank you for letting me vent. I've been pent up with angst and anxiety over student loans and other monies that I must pay for my medical conditions. Now, I hope my venting will not be taken as "just" venting. Thank you again. Most sincerely and truly, "Lee"

  • meanwhile in the real world
  • Posted by Conor King , Australian higher education commentator on September 24, 2009 at 8:30pm EDT
  • Elsewhere in the civilized world Governments have discovered student loans tied to repayments based on annual income, payments made through the tax system. Yes the Government underwrites the costs (loans are subject to an inflation adjustment only, no real interest and a proportion - 10 to 20% - is not repaid. Now I realise that in the US tax is a naughty word and direct Government assistance almost as bad but yes there are options that work, elsewhere..

  • Income Based Repayment
  • Posted by Observer on September 25, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • The new Income Based Repayment option should benefit many students who are struggling to pay back their Federal student loans. While this doesn't help those that took out private loans, it's a start.

    As for everything being "our money", money costs money. period. It's called cost of funds. What tax rate are you prepared to charge in order to give money to students at no cost (not charge interest)? Someone has to pay for the cost of the funds over time.

    American's are looking for something for nothing. Consumers and lenders. Consumers want free money and lenders want zero risk with 100% reward. It doesn't work that way.

  • Lets Get Real Here
  • Posted by M. T. Pockets on September 25, 2009 at 1:30pm EDT
  • ALL of the laws that have been put into place concerning Bankruptcy and Student Loans have been for the benefit of the lenders. There is no true level playing field between the lenders and the students. A valid point has been made that given the fact the cost of tuition continues to rise as more and more jobs are being sent overseas and the prevailing wage is decreasing.

    We, students and former students have become nothing more that cash cows. We can work our entire life and NEVER pay off these loans. Employers want a well educated workforce, however, our government has seen fit to ensure this well educated workforce will be submissive.

    When someone is saddled with more debt than can be expected to ever be paid off, they will bow and do as told in fear of loosing their jobs. This is exactly what the government and employers want. They don't want a workforce that is going to truly stand up for themselves and complain about working conditions, poor pay, etc. in fear of loosing their jobs.

    Truly, those in need of help concerning their student loans should get it and if it means the ability to discharge these loans FULLY, both government and privately backed loans, so be it.

    People should not be interrigated to no ends about their inability to pay these loans. Be they public or private, a loan is a loan is a loan and the same protections should be afforded to the borrower. The lenders know the majority who take these loans will have difficulty paying them and they truly do want them to go into default.

    In the end, the only one who truly wins at this time are the lenders. Yes, bring back TOTAL consumer protections to include bankruptcy.

  • College Education is No Longer an Investment...
  • Posted by Jill on September 26, 2009 at 5:15am EDT
  • but, then again, what is these days? On one hand, graduates explain that it is unfair if student loans carry consumer protection. On the other, graduates explain that a college education is necessary for survival and are willing to pay the price. My personal truth is that my life has been completely destroyed because of student loans. I am a firm believer in education but I would not recommend that any college person to utilize student loans. Then people ask, "How do I pay for college without loans?" My response is, "How are you going to survive with these loans?" It's a losing battle either way. I have a Master's Degree and have not been able to find full-time employment for 2 years. And, no, I cannot get a retail job in the mall because I have 6 years of higher education under my belt. My credit is ruined because I am filing for bankruptcy and foreclosing on my home so that my father can at least keep up with the fluctuating and compounding interest rates after I default. And, defaulting is right around the corner. So, I can kiss any professional license and decent job good-bye. These frigging loans are pure evil and I have both, federal and private. What's done is done. I had to learn the hard way.

    My goal is to get the message out to future and current students about the dangers of student loans. I'm not shy when I tell my story to others. If you know anybody who is or is thinking about getting roped into this scam, please tell them not to do it. Financial aid advisors surely are not going to warn these kids. The last stats I researched indicated that 1 out of 3 loans are in default. My hope is that the dangers of student loans will spread and kids will at least have the opportunity of being an informed consumer. There are few jobs for new grads and no guarantee that any jobs will be created in the future. It doesn't appear that our government is going to consequence these student loan scam artists. However, these scammers will suffer natural consequences just by the mere fact that kids will decide to do something else with their life. Please...DO NOT TAKE OUT STUDENT LOANS. You will live a life of oppression until the day you die. The student loan industry, along with the government, have designed a brilliant plan to ensure this happens.

  • Jill's right
  • Posted by DFS on September 26, 2009 at 2:30pm EDT
  • I saved enough money hanging wallpaper, painting houses, and tending bar -- often all at once -- to afford a bachelor's. Then, in my senior spring semester, I came down with cancer.

    The VA took care of the radiation, thank God for avoiding that $40,000 or so bill, but I still was then forced to take out the Stafford Loan to continue my education.

    I only recently was able finally to pay that one off.

    I can only imagine what life must be like when someone has to take out a loan to cover their first (if not their only) degree.

    If the marketplace was devoid of such usury, then education should become more affordable.

    But, that's a pipe dream now, in view of the entrenched interests in Washington, DC.

  • Lots of History Here
  • Posted by BurnBrother on September 27, 2009 at 12:00am EDT
  • As some of you have noted, the reason that student loans became non-dischargeable in bankruptcy was due to abuse of the bankruptcy code. Some of you may be old enough to remember when recent graduates, particularly those with high loan balances for advanced or professional degrees thought it was a good "life strategy" to immediately file bankruptcy after completing their required education. Since they weren't making any money because they just graduated the courts were allowing full discharge of the debts in most cases. Then they started their careers out as a prior bankrupt, but were normally making good money due to their chosen profession so over time their lives generally turned out OK from an earnings and credit standpoint.

    Eventually the lenders and courts figured out the scam, hence the change in the law. Frankly, I'd like to know how many currently wealthy doctors, dentists, lawyers, etc. took this strategy as it is 100% wrong from an ethical standpoint. If this information was available I'd make it a personal project to expose the people that did this, just to be fair to the folks that actually paid back their student loans.

    That said, I don't think that anyone should go in debt for a BS or BA, period. I work in finance and hire a lot of new college grads so I get an earful on this type of thing and it's pretty painful.

    Here are the people that I see getting into the most trouble on student loans:

    - Graduates from regional private liberal arts schools that were fooled into thinking that $40K per year was reasonable to earn a degree from a school with little incremental "industry" value over a good state school.

    - Unfortunate souls who get sold a bill of goods to get a degree or more likely a "certificate" in something like nursing, technology, truck driving or some other industry with questionable "guarantees" of jobs upon graduation. A lot of these schools are close to criminal in my opinion, as are the lenders that they work with. They are preying on people that are not sophisticated or able to protect themselves, although they should be.

    - Degreed individuals that get sold a bill of goods by state universities and / or questionable value type institutions similar to the University of Phoenix that getting a "Working MBA" or other masters degrees either on the weekends, on-line or at night is somehow worth between $40K to $80K in debt. It's particularly sad to see single mothers who are only trying to get ahead to sign up for the pipe dream that a masters is going to get you where you need to be. I'm in CA, so a masters from USC or UCLA maybe, but from anyplace else it's a stretch and a HUGE GAMBLE if you are borrowing all of the money to do it.

    - Finally the naive recent four year graduates that take the path of least resistance and move straight into a Masters and then sometimes a PhD program, continuing to run their student loan balances through the roof. Most industries aren't really that interested in candidates with advanced degrees with no prior real world experience. There are of course some schools that are an exception, but they are most certainly an exception. I've personally had employees that made their career decisions based upon if and when they were considered "employed" as they knew at that point that they would have to start dealing with their student loans. I've seen many "technically" continue their educations not because they necessarily wanted the degree, but because they could borrow more money AND delay paying off their own previous loans. Many of the people that complain about the high balances were the ones that were more than happy to live off these funds back in the day. So there is plenty of blame to go around.

    As several have already noted, borrowing for school should be the same as any other borrowing. Keep it to a minimum. Don't borrow more than you can reasonably expect to pay back. Don't look for a bail out to your bad decisions.

  • Mass Loan Bankruptcies and Other Fairytales
  • Posted by Ed McKinley on September 27, 2009 at 11:45am EDT
  • "As some of you have noted, the reason that student loans became non-dischargeable in bankruptcy was due to abuse of the bankruptcy code. Some of you may be old enough to remember when recent graduates, particularly those with high loan balances for advanced or professional degrees thought it was a good "life strategy" to immediately file bankruptcy after completing their required education.'

    The above quote from the prior post is a very good example of an urban legend supporting bad legislation. Please provide some reliable evidence to support the reality of this claim. You cannot.
    The Government Accounting Office's own review of this claim has already been soundly defeated. In fact, it was found that during the period when student loans were dischargable in bankruptcy, fewer than 1% of loans eligible to do so actually did.
    This figure was found to be significantly lower than bankruptcies that were executed for other forms of consumer debt. That includes credit card debt which by the way is a nother form of completely unsecured debt that allows individuals to continue the use of the products and services that were purchased and caoont be reposessed.
    The notion that restoring bankruptsy protection to student loan borrowers will lead to a stampede of "scam artists" beating a path to bankruptcy courts is based on a myth.
    What has occured, however, is that by excluding consumer protections from this type of loan, lenders have become wealthier while borrowers who have struggled with their debt have been exploited.
    Lenders incur virtually no risk. Lenders realize enormous profits. Taxpayers unwittingly, are already being held on the hook. College tuition and fees have skyrocketed. Many, many thousands of borrowers are lanquishing in financial ruin.

  • You're Dreaming
  • Posted by BurnBrother on September 29, 2009 at 5:15am EDT
  •  

    Mr. Ed,

     

    How about if you provide a legitimate source for your GAO data and clarify your background concerning your expertise on this subject. I'd love to look at all of the detail and have a more dynamic discussion with you. If you will review my original comment I didn't address the frequency of the scam, just that it existed in the real world. It's not urban legend as you claim and it was material enough to drive the referenced bankruptcy legislation.

     

    I only wish that I had legal access to the student loan charge off and personal bankruptcy data during that window of time as I would love to publish the detail as to the professionals that effectively "stole" their educations and contrast that to those that actually paid off their student loans as agreed.

     

    In any case your relation of credit card debt to student loan debt reveals your lack of knowledge of how these types of lending work. If you have a credit card I'm thinking that you are well aware of the high interest rates charged on them. They are obviously priced for higher losses than student loans. Frankly if Student Loan bankruptcy losses are anything near Credit Card bankruptcy losses, given normal industry pricing it is obvious that there will be a problem with Student Loan bankruptcies from a loss reserve standpoint. The 1% bankruptcy loss rate you quote is meaningless without context.

     

    My experience with posts like yours is that the background is normally linked to poorly thought out student loan borrowing decisions on a personal level, which normally gives a poster an axe to grind on repayment when the chips are down.

     

    My original post stands and you've done nothing but reinforce my strongly held opinion that student loan borrowing should only be incurred in the event a reasonable and justifiable case for repayment can be made before borrowing the money. When it is borrowed it needs to be paid back. Period.

     

    I must say this brings up a good question for you since you seem to have a strongly held opinion…should student loans just be forgiven whenever borrowers find if inconvenient or difficult to repay them as they originally agreed? I'd be fascinated to understand your plan.

     

    I'm sure you are a college grad, as I am. This will be a conversation for another day, but the actual use to which student loan borrowers have put their loan proceeds to is the stuff of legend as is their gaming of the system to delay and ultimately avoid repayment.

     

  • I Wish I Was Dreaming
  • Posted by Edward McKinley on September 29, 2009 at 8:15pm EDT
  • Dear Mr. BurnBrother,

    If you really waqnt to be taken seriously why don't you stop hiding behind some fictitious name. I am a real person with a real name.

    Try providing what you ask for. You offer no support whatsoever for your claims. If you really want to know who the folks are that "scammed" their way through bankruptcy, do the legwork. Most of this information is public. I suggest you pack a lunch though as identifying these cases is like searching for a needle in a haystack. They are a miniscule portion of all cases discharged through bankruptcy.
    Your refernce to credit card debt suggests you have little knowledge of the student loan industry. If you did, you would be aware of the enormous profits built into this sytem. High interest rates of up tp 20% or more on private loans aside, goverment subsidies, fees on loan consolidation, and the predatory fee's and interest charged on defaulted loans would make even the most aggressive credit card lenders blush.
    In my experience Mr. BurnBrother, people who defend the predatory practices of student loans and demonize borrowers who have had trouble repaying their loans are usually people who do so annonymously because they prefer not to disclose that they are somehow tied to the rediculous profits that have resulted from a system that has become the most predatory loan instrument in US history.
    Tell people who you are and what your interest is in this subject or move on.

  • Bankruptcy Rights for student loans.
  • Posted by Alan Collinge , Founder at StudentLoanJusticeOrg on October 1, 2009 at 9:15pm EDT
  • Academia should be deeply ashamed. Ashamed, and embarrassed that it has aligned itseld with professional spin doctors like "Jo", and faux libertarians (I presume by the name) pretending to be staking out a middle ground like "CatoRenaci". I don't mean that in a small way. I mean it in a way that is deep, meaningful, and as strong as the constitution of this country.

    Student Loans are the only type of loan in our nation's history to be specifically exempted from standard consumer protections including not only bankruptcy, but also statutes of limitations, fair debt collection practices, truth in lending requirements, state usury laws, and even refinancing rights under the FFELP program (and the Direct program as well). The student loan system has also been given collection powers that know no equal of any loans in this country.

    This combination, achieved through the hijacking of our nation's Congress, has given rise to a clearly predatory system, and has directly caused the downfall of millions of our citizens. We have shown this over, and over, and over again through our activities over the past five years, and no one- anonymous or named, has been able to refute this statement. Certainly not the cowardly pundits on this board with their overused, overplayed, and exhausted pleas to our baser instincts.

    The facts are clear: There was never any rational basis for making student loans unique from every other type of loan, federallly guaranteed or not...secured or unsecured. As was pointed out above, when student loans were fully dischargeable in bankruptcy, far less than 1% were discharged through bankruptcy. It was a crisis "in the imagination" according to a member of Congress who witnessed this legislation roll through, buoyed solely by dramatic, anecdotal stories that represented a vanishingly small segment of student borrowers. Much like what is being attempted here, again, on this board, by the cowards who, acting purely out financial self interest, again trot out anecdotes designed to bring out disrespectful, and paternalistic instincts.

    I must say, however, that I am also very disappointed that the former students on this board have failed to make the correct argument, here, and instead can't get past defending themselves and their personal situations. Anyone who has considered this issue deeply, personally, and for a long period of time should know better by now.

    While the damage that this predatory lending system has done to individuals is severe, dramatic, and compelling, the damage that the removal of bankruptcy, and other protections has done on the system as a whole is what should have been pointed out by now on this board. This combination of fees, lack of consumer protections, and collection powers has perverted, conflicted, and corrupted the entire system...to the point where the interests of the lending system and the interests of the students are diametrically opposed.

    Except for the students, EVERY functional element of this system is MAKING, not LOSING money on defaulted loans. From the Collection companies, to the Guarantors, and even the federal government...defaulted loans generate income, and it is clearly in the financial interest of these elements that students default. The Education Department will certainly claim otherwise, but by its own admission, it is likely realizing every penny of principal, plus almost 20% in interest and collection costs on defaulted loans. The guarantors would not exist but for defaulted loans, nor would the collection companies.

    This environment has caused the federal government to become bureaucratically lazy. It has no skin in the game. It could care less if a student defaults or not. I argue that on balance, it would rather a student default for fiscal reasons.

    This is why we see only token resistance everytime the student loan system railroads another raise in the loan caps through Congress. This is why all of the entities mentioned above, and also the univerisities, lie to the public with their advertisements of 5%-7% default rates, when in actual fact, students are defaulting at a rate of about 1 in 3 , if not higher. This is higher than the default rate of any loan in our nation, including subprime home mortgages.

    This is why we see unchecked inflation, horrible customer service, irresponsible universities, corruption and an ever increasing debt load on our students. It has gone far past the point where idiots making their shameful pitches (as above) can alter perception. It has truly reached the point where it is very likely that confidence in the entire lending system is teetering o9n the brink of collapse, and I mean that with absolutely no hyperbole. I am not a person prone to make hyperbolic statements, and never have been.

    Bankruptcy protections for ALL student loans are the minimum that Congress MUST do if it wants to preserve the integrity of the system. Of course this will reorient the motivations of the various functional elements of the system to be in luine with the intersts of the students, where they should have always been. Unfortunately, this will cause the systme to lose when the student loses. Therefore, the government will be compelled to act to ensure that the students succeed. This sea change in motivations will have deep and profound affects on the system in a way that will stamp out corruption, force low prices, reduce the amount of lending occuring overall, and will restore "good government"...something that the conflicted corrupted officials at the Office of Federal Student Aid will probably not be able to work under (newcomers notwithstanding, of course).

    What is perhaps most disappointing to me personally is the fact that we are even here at all,. This should have never happened. The "student advoates", that were around when these changes began, and the current "student advocates" who schmooze inside the beltway today, should have shouted from the rooftops when this began to happen years ago, and should, today, have the return of bankruptcy protections for ALL student loans at the top of their agenda today. Instead, they are wary of even bringing up the subject publicly, and the best they seem to be able to come up with are these feeble, nearly meaningless efforts such as what is discussed in the article above. The student loan lobbyists are sharks with no moral compass, and no concern for the welfare of the students....but they rarely claim to be. The "student advocates", however, have appointed themselves as the represnetatives of these interests. That they failed so badly, and that they refuse to acknowledge this fact, and that they are unwilling to work to swiftly rectify this horrible, harmful mistake today is probably worthy of the harshest criticism of all the conflicted, corrupted players in this fiasco.

    It has been nearly five long, frustrating years of fighting the lending system, and pleeing to organizations claiming to be fighting for students to actually FIGHT FOR STUDENTS. I sincerely hope that the latter wake up, face reality, choose sides, and come around to representing the interests of the students on this issue NOW, rather than continuing in the despicable, hand-wringing, duplicitous fashion that they have to date. T%he entire system, quite frankly, depends upon it.

     

  • Morally Speaking
  • Posted by David Gresham , na at na on October 1, 2009 at 11:15pm EDT
  • To those of you decrying "personal responsibility," no doubt you would allow for credit cards to be discharged through bankruptcy if need be, but when it's your money (tax money), you start crying like children. Land of the free, home of hypocrisy.

  • There is nothing fair about the guaranteed loans
  • Posted by WI Will , Still drowning on October 2, 2009 at 7:15am EDT
  • The unfairness, and hardship that is endured by, yes a minority, but a large number of middle class ambitious students that fell into a trap and believed education was a good risk, is unconscionable.

    When my life and resources suddenly and unexpectedly dried up in 1998/1999, and I found myself on the very edge of homelessness, I never thought my fellow Americans would have erected such an impossible barrier to reentry into a solvent life. My federal student loan is apparently special, it came with a 9% fixed rate and could not be negotiated with consolidation like everyone elses. Further, when I took out my loan, the rules were different, I took a chance I know. But special interests, armed with a lie (that there were hordes of lazy good for nothings racking up student loans and not attempting to get degrees) took away bankruptcy protection that would have been a life saver. My risk was changed from what I agreed to take on and my life has been hell ever since with no way out.

    I worked very hard for my degree from one of the nations top schools, but unfortunately my efforts failed me, the economy failed, and I am left, not unlike many financial institutions, and even some "non-profit" student loan vendors, in need of a fresh start. Further while my degree can not be repossessed, I also can not return as the defective misrepresented investment that it was for a refund.

    With 20/20 hind sight you might argue I made mistakes, and I will grant you that; but to have a system in place that forces me, and hundreds of thousands of others, into permanent insolvency and even threatens to take away my social security, for the rest of my productive days is draconian, un-Amerian and selfish.

    When your brother promises to pick you up at the airport, but does not make it because he has to take his wife to the hospital, it is common sense, your forgive him. If your brother fails to pick you up because he was out partying you probably are not so quick to forgive.

    Those of you out there trying to make us all look like a bunch of irresponsible partiers, we were not and are not. I am sorry but I did not meet these people your have conjured up in your imagination in school. Mostly I met a bunch of very geeky, socially awkward, hard working ambicisous young Americans looking to improve their employability, create new business opportunities and otherwise help the American economy grow. Many made it, or if not, had relatives that could bail them out. Some of us were far less fortunate.

    Limiting bankruptcy reform to the private "for profit" loans is a pointless joke because the loan industry players have had the smarts and resources to have made themselves all non-profits for the most part. In my case, I was forced to consolidate to avoid default in 2003 and now my loan is with the government, but it was once with a for profit that now has a non-profit subsid, (imagine that).

    Again you (the powers that be) offer a semblance of change and action, but really it is just empty words that give a minute level of protection to a very very few.

    I am 53, working my butt off, with a 2 year old, and because I have tried to succeed, I will not qualify for bankrutpcy protection because it would cost me $20,000 to try to have a bankruptcy lawyer and a bunch of financial experts prove that the $300,000 plus I am now in debt (and which grows by 2000 a month) is an undue hardship - (despite the fact that I have qualified for a hardship deferral every year for the past five years). Given that I was left destitute without assets in 1999, and could not find meaningful gainful employment until 2004, I do not have the funds to risk trying, but then I also do not have the income to pay the loans.

    So there you have it, classic Catch - 22 BS, implemented by special interests to garner profits while at the same time making it appear on paper that there is some way of being equitable. There is not and way to get fair equitable treatment, unless you die, but I have heard the bill collectors keep calling anyway.

    As Alan points out, this system has hurt individuals a great deal, but in doing so it is leaving a mark on the system. There are more and more of us every day. We are getting loader and loader every day. The system has funneled money into education and allowed it to get bloated, and inflationary. This is creating a spiraling effect where more and more students need more and more loans, and more and more are going to end up as permanent indentured servants forever insolvent, afraid to procreate, or so depressed and pressured out they commit suicide. Then again, maybe they will realize they should say no to these loans, and college enrollments will come crashing down. Can anyone say "positive feed back loop", or better yet, Ponzi scheme. Eventually it must fail.

    There must be a cost to the lender for lending too much money into a market, if there is not, this is what happens, inflation, predatory practices and lives destroyed.

    Those of your reading this, earning a fat check at a University or with a loan company, you can not hide your heads in the sand any longer, you can not continue to step on us - guilt free at least - anymore.

    You can not leave us to wallow in the results of your greed and averance (no matter the noble intentions) and we should not have to pay for what you wrought.

    Things must change, if for no other reason, then it is just plain BAD Customer Service form the financial, government and loan industries. Your loan products destroy people the way bad automobiles and other bad products do. The fact that most of your products were successful does not excuse the excesses and the failures.

  • It's a start
  • Posted by Nicole Mayer , Lawyer/advocate at James Hoyer on October 2, 2009 at 11:00am EDT
  • I understand some peoples' frustration with what went on at this hearing but in reality it is a good thing! We have to keep in mind that this Subcommittee is tasked with specific things and can't address all the problems we see in the student loan industry. When I spoke with them, it was indicated that they were able to specifically discuss bankruptcy in regards to private student loans. They can't act on items outside their authority.

    I am proud that these people came forward and were willing to speak about topics that so many are resistant to. As we know, it's not easy to fight the student lenders with all their influence. Yes, more can be done, but this was the proper forum to address the subjects they did discuss and I'm appreciative of their efforts.

    In addition, we have to start somewhere. The argument for discharging private loans is a much easier one because it is so easily compared to credit cards. When you get into the federal loans, you're on the level of a tax debt because the taxpayers lose money. Progress doesn't happen overnight and I am on board with any change we can get made. Once that's done, we'll push for more.

    Hopefully if there is progress with private loans and it turns out not to be the end of the world as Representative Franks implied, then people will be more open-minded to change in all aspects of student lending.

    Unfortunately, there isn't really a forum to go to and get full legislative change to every aspect of all student loans.

    I think another committee would have to address the consumer protection issues such as collections-which is much needed. That is not within the providence of this judiciary subcommittte to my knowledge. If we can identify that committee then we can call for a hearing there. We the people, are the ones who need to make the call and reach out to those who can help us.

    In terms of whatever legislation potentially comes from this hearing, I think we all need to examine it very carefully to make sure there are no loopholes for private lenders who may have hid behind "non-profit" organizations when in reality the loans were 100% for profit. We need to pay attention to every word of any legislation regarding student lending. I am committed to doing that.

    Please don't lose hope just because everything is not happening at once. The legislators may not share our outrage (yet) but at the very least they are paying attention. Now it's up to us to make sure they follow through.

  • Defaults lead to permanent unemployment too.
  • Posted by Mike A on October 2, 2009 at 12:00pm EDT
  • Defaults lead to permanent unemployment too.

    I borrowed close to $50,000 but now I owe $107,000. Loans helped me get my BA and go to grad school after my US Navy military service. But, they did not help me get a job to pay them off. When you default, like I did during the 2001-2002 recession, it goes onto your credit report and you can't get a job. I have not had a full time job since 2001.

    Here's what happens. When you apply for a job the potential employer checks your credit report. If you have a default, you don't get hired. Months and years pass by because of this. You cant' get hired to pay off your loans. The interest rises, your credit score falls further and after being out of work so long potential employers will not even consider hiring you. This happened to me. I have been out of work for 7 years despite my education and military service.

    And by the way, since I cannot get a job or do anything about the compound interest, when I die I will probably owe millions of dollars too.

  • "Student Advocates" Don't Speak for Us
  • Posted by Student Loan Refugee on October 2, 2009 at 12:15pm EDT
  • Its really sickening to see supposed student advocates bending over backwards to make the federal student loan program seem like a socialist paradise in order to pass largely meaningless legislation on private loans. News Flash: even if this legislation pasess, most people suffering private student loan debt won't be helped, because most private loans are nominally guaranteed by "non-profit" entities (many of which are nothing more than front organizations thrown up by for-profit banks to take advantage to the exception to discharge). These loans will still be perpetually non-dischargeable.

    Look, there is no good reason to deny bankruptcy protections to either private or federal student loans. Continuing to do so only serves to hurt everyone through the back door as the debt burden on the young generation depresses their purchasing power stunting whatever economic recovery is supposed to be under way. Are you listening Representative Cohen? Go ahead, continue to shoot the nation in the foot to protect the interests of a few banks.

    If federal student loans were so great, why are people literally fleeing the country because of them? Answer me that. Sad, that American student debtors only chance for fair treatment under the law has to come in another country.

  • I Hear you Nicole
  • Posted by Student Loan Refugee on October 2, 2009 at 1:00pm EDT
  • ....but the supposed "student advocates" didn't have to go out of their way to favorably compare federal loans to private loans. In doing so, they are just making it harder to get meaningful change to the bankruptcy laws when it comes to federal loans. Please do work hard to make sure the phony "non-profit" loans are not exempted from whatever legislation comes out of this. Also, a clearer, more reasonable definition of "undue hardship" would be a big step forward, but even these measures are not enough.

  • reposses
  • Posted by Ryan on October 2, 2009 at 1:00pm EDT
  • IHE Reader I disagree. Degrees could be repossessed. If I declared bankruptcy then they could take back the degree and I would no longer be able to use it. A college could simply be notified that the degree is no longer valid and your record would be archived and wiped away. Why not? Because law makers would then be faced with the fact that the student loan program they have created really is 'crap'. I can't understand why no one has thought of doing away with loans period and offering everyone free tuition to state schools or to training? I suppose our lawmakers can really care less about the education of the average U.S. citizen. Until they start to value every citizen then loans will continue to be the way. All of this garbage about restoring a little bit of rights is like giving a bone to a dog. lol

  • Student Loans - More Power than the IRS
  • Posted by Frank Crow on October 3, 2009 at 7:00am EDT
  • I never had a student loan. I do know quite a bit about the IRS tax code. Even the IRS can only collect on *filed* tax returns for a period of 10 years. That's right. If you owe the IRS, file all your delinquent tax returns immediately and that starts the 10 year clock ticking.

    The IRS is very powerful, and if you can pay off your debt in that 10 year period, they will most likely get it from you. If they can't get it from you in that 10 year period then you very likely qualify for an offer in compromise or just plain old forgiveness of the amount that cannot be collected in a ten year period.

    Also, the IRS has very well defined methods of discharge due to various hardships. Likewise with state taxes.

    POINT BEING that EVEN THE IRS does NOT have the power that is given to student loan organizations.

    HOW can that be OK in any case whatsoever??

    EVEN FEDERAL TAXES CAN BE FORGIVEN AND DISCHARGED BUT NOT STUDENT LOANS??

    Unfathomable.

  • School Closure and Private Student Loans
  • Posted by Pete Lown , Attorney on October 3, 2009 at 11:15am EDT
  • Here's a scenario for disaster. Students with federally insured student loans are protected against school closing (the loans are discharged by DOE), but private student loans are not protected. When an post-secondary school funded with private student loans closes, the student still own the money even though they received neither the money nor the educational benefit. And, these loans are non-dischargable in bankruptcy. In one recent case about 2,500 students owed 60-100,000 and got nothing.

  • I sold my life to the company store
  • Posted by Heidi on October 3, 2009 at 5:00pm EDT
  • Because I happened to consolidate my early loans in a particularly bad year, I am now paying $1000 interest a month. I thought I was going to have $300-400 payment - instead ....

    My bank is out of business. My loans were bought and sold several times. The end result is that I owe well over double what I borrowed.

    This is usury. And there is no lawyer that will touch it.

    Why punish the brightest assets of this country? I believe we may the only country that does this.

    I cannot afford to take a teaching position, so the value of the Ph.D. is personal. Meanwhile, I have to start all over in the workforce. Was this the idea for the humanities?

  • What's it like to live in an Alternate Reality?
  • Posted by Burn Brother on October 5, 2009 at 1:45pm EDT
  •  

    Mr. Ed,

     

    I'm providing just as much support for my claims as you are for yours, so don't try me on. Please spare me your sanctimonious rant. The last time I checked the concept of paying your bills as originally agreed to is pretty basic to the success of the American system. Let me know if you are aware of other facts.

     

    Unlike many of the posters on this blog, I'm a successful professional that has no compelling motive to give you my real world name, as I actually continue to work and pay bills as I originally signed up for. I don't need a bunch of unemployed or marginally employed degreed geniuses that borrowed more than they can pay back taking pot shots at me in the real world.

     

    I've been employed in automotive consumer lending, not student lending, since I got out of college. You know what I've learned? Everyone has an excuse as to why they don't have their act together and can't pay their bills. The next logical step for most defaulting borrowers is that they shouldn't be responsible for their decisions because someone evil lent them the money, although it certainly didn't stop them from spending it. What a surprise. So I've pretty much "been there, done that" on hearing excuses as to why borrows can't, won't or don't want to pay back money they have borrowed.

     

    Tell you what Mr. Ed, how about if we get really honest on this blog and whenever anyone posts to this string they have to disclose how much they have in outstanding student loan balances at the time they post? Seem fair? Just for fun let's have everyone also disclose their highest level of education or certification. i.e. MA, PHD, MD, JD or whatever. That will certainly help everyone's perspective. I expect most of you goofs won't sign up for this as you owe tons of money that you borrowed on a poorly thought out basis and now can't pay back. Further I honestly believe that most of the posters on this blog are only involved to support their selfish, entitled, self-serving and narcissist view of world. Oh, and get a free college education through bankruptcy discharge. I almost forgot.

     

    I'll Start - BurnBrother - Outstanding Student Loan Balances - $0.0K - that's zero for you non-financial folks.

     

    Now I'm thinking that the first thing you will do is try to call BS on me since I haven't disclosed my personal information. In that context here's what I'll do. I'll put a copy of my personal credit report on file with my CPA, who can act as an ombudsman, in disclosing student loan facts to interested parties. TO BE CLEAR - I won't do this unless you are willing to disclose your student borrowing on the same terms. You can reach me at pepper5171@gmail.com. Don't email me if you aren't willing to do the same and don't waste my time if you're not serious, as my CPA doesn't work for free. How's that for stepping up?

     

    I must say, after reading subsequent posts to my original input, you folks are really scary. I don't know that I've ever witnessed a group of people so unwilling to take responsibility for their actions and I thought I'd seen it all when it comes to money and what people will do to avoid their responsibilities. You ought to be ashamed of yourselves.

     

    Burn

     

  • Only Seeking a Fair Shake
  • Posted by Esq. on October 5, 2009 at 10:00pm EDT
  • It's funny how a lot of people who seem dead set against student loan reform, act like any and everyone who ever defaulted on a student loan is a total flake. I pay about $800/mo for my student loans, and have faithfully done so for the past five years [and the balances are still several hundred dollars HIGHER than they were 5 years ago]. But, truth be told, it may take another 20 years to pay them off, and a LOT can happen in that time such as unemployment, and serious injury. And while I have insurance, $800 does not leave a whole lot of room to establish savings.

    It's also funny that the US offers thousands of dollars in tax deductions for home ownership, but deductible interest for student loans, which can easily rival mortgages, are capped at a $2500 deduction and phase out after $55k in earnings.

  • Don't Necessarily Disagree
  • Posted by Burn Brother on October 10, 2009 at 2:30pm EDT
  • @ Esq,

    I don't really have a problem with tax deductibility of student loan interest on state and federal income taxes. It also might have the positive effect of influencing the level of financial support the government is willing to give to these private lenders due to the expense to the government of the tax deductibility. Might be good overall.

    Most of my co-workers and employees that have student debt have "done the math" and taken a look at the interest rates on their student loans versus how much they might save if they paid off their loans by other means, say home equity lines on which interest is tax deductible to a certain level. Unfortunately this approach doesn't work so well now that the real estate market is in trouble.

    I don't think all student loan borrowers are flakes. My frustration is that like a lot of things that are going on in the lending world right now, the people that were sensible and thought through their borrowing decisions early on will be unfairly impacted if we end up in a situation with people that overextended themselves by over borrowing are now given relief. It's a basic fairness issue.

    There are many people who would have liked to have attended a "better" or "private" school for their undergraduate studies but didn't do so because it didn't seem that the numbers worked. Similarly, most folks employed in the business world are well aware that a MBA improves their perceived value in the market. That increase in perceived value doesn't necessarily justify the investment, particularly if it is borrowed money that has to be paid back.

    Burn

  • An All For One
  • Posted by M.T. Pockets on October 19, 2009 at 11:45am EDT
  • Well, after reading some of the responses on here I thought it appropriate to give my story as well.

    I have been FORCED to close my business due to the current economic melt down. Due to this FACT, I have lost my house, EVERY debt be they business or personal when into collection. I was FORCED to file bankruptcy on my mortgage, business, and EVERY of other thing that I owed EXCEPT my student loans.

    So, given the FACT that I was doing well until around 2007 when the economy started to slide, things did begin to get tight but no where to the level they are today.

    I have no hope of being able to earn a LIVEABLE salary in the near future. But, I am EXPECTED to pay on student loans no matter what, there seems to be something wrong with this picture.

    If they do turn the laws around and get their minds in proper order, they should reestablish standard consumer protections to ALL student loans and not just private ones.

  • Throwing stones
  • Posted by Singlemom on October 22, 2009 at 12:30am EDT
  • I've been researching bankruptcy and the ability to add any kind of student loan to it and I happened along this site.

    I'll tell my story so BurnBrother can bash me, seems Burn gets a kick out of that.

    I chose to go to school 7 years ago, I thought it would give me an advantage in the job market, for beter income and a bit of "job security" with a degree. I was making very little when I chose to go to school, also, I knew the debt I was assuming at the time and assumed that getting my degree would place me in a job to which I could afford to pay my debt back.
    See, Alot of us turn to college and the heaping student loans because we are in financial duress and want a chance to change that.

    I worked as a CNA for years trying to live on that measly income and wanted more. I went to school and got my nursing degree. I found a job making great money and was able to support my family and pay my bills.

    In the last 2 years I got injured on the job, was belittled by my employer and eventually left my job without anything. No workman's comp, nothing. I lost my house, my car and am now DEEPLY in debt. I am now disabled due to my work injury and collect a measly amount from that.

    So, I guess that makes me a loser who can't pay off her student loans right BurnBrother?

    Someone spoke of repossession not being an option for Student Loan companies....I would gladly turn over my degree, since It is now useless to me for a forgiveness of what I owe at this point.

    That, to me, would be fair. I borrowed the money for the degree that I can no longer use. In filing bankruptcy, they may take that degree back. Just as my car was repossessed because I couldn't pay for it.

    I suppose there are people out there that may try to get away with not paying their student loans. To assume that every last one of us that find themselves in a way that they cannot pay them back, is trying to cheat the system or just doesn't WANT to pay a loan they signed for is ridiculous and small minded.

    I applaud those that can actually bring their student loans to a zero balance. I had trouble keeping my household, taking care of my kids and paying all my other bills along with my student loans.

    I don't care what anyone says, the Student Loan system is seriously flawed in the amounts of interest they charge once someone does get behind with loans increasing to sometimes 3 times what was initially borrowed to begin with.

    Things happen that are beyond your control, no one knows what lies ahead in the future.

  • Some Interesting Points
  • Posted by Jill on October 25, 2009 at 8:45am EDT
  • A previous commenter posted that Degrees can "essentially" be given back. I consider "the degree" to be a legal binding document. My bachelors degree reads that I "have been admitted to the Degree of.... and is entitled to all rights and honors thereto appertaining." One argument made by those against student loan protection indicate that after bankruptcy, the graduate can still earn money using his or her degree. This is probably why professional licenses are stripped from defaulters (so that you can't use it). Could we give the degree back and give up our rights as degree holders? I'll tell ya', the he!! of going through school is not worth a lifetime of oppression.

    As I mentioned before, I f--ked up my own life by trying to excel. The consequences are what they are. However, I cannot stress how important it is to warn the incoming undergrad and graduate classes of the student loan scam. These loans are designed so that the individual defaults. Most of the jobs that I am qualified for require a credit check and/or professional license. I have been unemployed from full-time status for 2 years.

    Another great point in a previous post is: We, the student/graduate, did not change the risk in the student loan industry. Overall, the credit and lending system decided to up the ante on all lending. The results have proven to be fatal. The government comes in and bails them out. What about the consumer? What the majority of Americans are faced with is analogous to this: It's like the consumer throwing chips down on a gambling table. When all bets are final, the dealer changes the rules so that you lose and he wins. Are people going to continue doing business with this guy?

    I really have no problem filing for bankruptcy or letting my house go. I REFUSE to do business with any creditor or lender. You f--ked up. Oh, and you'll try and scare me about bad credit. I'm not afraid.

    They say payback is a b!tch? Well...not paying you (the lender) back is a hit twice as hard. Multiply me by millions of other p!ssed off Americans.

  • Missing the point?
  • Posted by Michael on October 27, 2009 at 7:30am EDT
  • Why should private student loans be treated any differently than any other type of debt? That's the issue, period. There's all these special protections for private student lenders and it's wrong.

  • Predatory Lending
  • Posted by Janet on November 8, 2009 at 2:15pm EST
  • Let's not forget that "predatory lending" in the student loan industry EQUATES with the predatory lending fiasco in the mortgage loan industry. Mortgage loans are NOT necessarily secured debt anymore while home values drop. Student loans are not secured debt, either. So why are mortgage loans easily discharged in bankruptcy while student loans are not? Federal student loans or private student loans--makes no difference as far as I can see. If a debtor can make the payments, they will. I would make my payments if I could, because the costs of not doing so are high: loss of self respect, loss of practice licenses, loss of credit, loss of eligibility for jobs paying $9.50/hr., constant phone calls, harrassment of family members, stress in the home causing physical illness for me AND my daughter.

    Someone please save me from myself, my ill-fated decision to take on student loan debt. If I could go back in time, I would not have done it. Hindsight is 20/20. Ten years in prison would have been of greater benefit.

    SOMEONE PLEASE SAVE ME

  • Bankrupt schools and Fraud Schools
  • Posted by Nathan , Management at Keller Graduate school on November 12, 2009 at 3:15pm EST
  • Student loan Bankruptcy code reform should include support for students who recieved loans from Fraud schools and preditory lending was used.

    I believe that all the student loans that were issued by schools that have closed now or in the past due to Fraud and/or Bankruptcy should be allowed part of the bankruptcy reform.

    What is your opinion?

  • Posted by Kevin on November 15, 2009 at 5:45am EST
  • Just be careful what you wish for.

    Student loan companies and collection agencies are already stepping up their game. Because of the recent news about Bankruptcy laws and Student loans we are going to see the default rate drop so to speak and a huge jump in filed judgements and lawsuits against consumers. In the end they are going to try to get their money and will up their collection activities... say, judgements, bank freezes, liens on you property. Consumers are really going to bear the brunt of this.

    Here is how I see it playing out...
    Bankruptcy goes up 3-5%,
    Default rates stay about the same or up 1 - 2 %,
    Judgments up 8%,
    and
    Suicide up 10%

  • I Value Education
  • Posted by Value at The University of Pennsylvania on November 15, 2009 at 1:30pm EST
  • I had no idea what I was getting into. When I took the leap into the pool, I had no idea that it was filled with quick sand. I remember, quite clearly, freaking out about how in the world I was going to find the money to continue pursuing my Master's degree at the University of Pennsylvania. Only one year into a three-year program, my funds dried up. Looking back, I was flying blind. The student loan officer informed me that my only option was to take out a private student loan. If I didn't, I would have to drop out of the program and go into "repayment" without a Master's to show for it. So, of course, I jumped for the life preserver they were offering- at least that's what I thought it was at the time.

    My parents never even made it to college- they certainly couldn't help me negotiate the process. They raised me to value education. "Do what you love!" No one informed me that these private loans were not subject to the same checks and balances that federal loans were held to. The most unfortunate thing is that there is no real way to determine how much debt you will incur or what your monthly payment will really be until you're done. Tuition continues to rise each year, and it's a crap shoot as to what they rate will be when it's time to consolidate it all. On top of that, private loan payments are not taken into account when calculating the percentage of your monthly income that can be paid on your federal loans. I wish someone had been obligated to inform me of this before I signed on the dotted line.

    I really thought pursuing an advanced degree from the top program in the country would pay off financially and give me the freedom to do what I love for a living. And at first it did. I was hired by a top firm shortly after graduation in 2007. I worked for 9 glorious months before I was laid off. I've now been unemployed for 17 months. The truth is, with 150,000 in federal loans, plus another 50,000 in private loans my payments are up around 1,500 per month. When I was employed, I spent 50 cents of every take-home dollar I earned on my student loan payments. So, my lifestyle ended up the same as if I'd taken a $10/hr job straight out of undergrad.

    Education is never a waist- even if it doesn't lead to employment. I don't regret the decisions I made because I still value my top-tier education. I only wish the rest of our country valued education as much as I do. If you want to learn and apply yourself and contribute to society, then I believe it should be a right and not just a privilege for students from wealthy parents. The american dream was only a dream. I wish someone had clarified that in elementary school- because I really believed...

  • It wasn't just me that got me in trouble
  • Posted by Seeking help on January 16, 2010 at 6:45am EST
  • Hey when I went to get student loans from the government there wasn't any look at what I currently had borrowed or what I was trying to borrow ontop of my existing student loan debt. Sure when I was 20 something I could get a good job and pay off what I could, but I got a BS and 2 Masters on government student loans and hit the cap limit on the lending which is $100,000 at 9% original interest, and then stupidity to consolidate for the lower rate of 2%, I know owe the government 170,000, when the principle borrowed was only 70,000. You tell me who's getting screwed. I'm now mid 40's, economy shaking, taking a 20% cut in my salary, and my husband is on a 100 a month pension and getting ss. The monthly payment is almost 1500 for these loans, which is one of my paychecks. How do I pay for food, home, etc. If the lending cap was a lot smaller, and a counselor attached to the government student loans to tell me what I was getting into when I received a check each trimester, I wouldn't of done what I did. It wasn't just me that got me in this trouble, the banks didn't help and now I can't pay this debt. Went bankrupt to see if that would help, but I can't get the loans forgiven. I would love to be able to wipe the interest away, redo the loan at the lower interest rate, and have a pmt closer to 2 - 400 dollars, but there are no options for me. Each so called payment help through the government lenders doesn't lower my payment, but increases as I get older which won't work either. I'll be on social security, and have it be garnished for my student loans which will mean nothing to me at 62. Does that seem fair???????