Home > 2014 > Students

10 Ways to Fix Student Loans in 2014

Advertiser Disclosure Comments 0 Comments

If you thought the politics behind the student loan pricing debate were contemptible, just wait until Congress takes up the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act this year.

For nearly a half century, the HEA has been responsible for a variety of financial assistance programs for students and educational institutions. Title IV is arguably the best known facet of the act. It governs Pell and Supplemental Education Opportunity grants, the Federal Work Study program, Perkins Loans, Direct Subsidized and Unsubsidized Stafford Loans and Direct PLUS Loans. (The FFEL program was discontinued in 2010.)

Although much of what promises to be yet another ideological altercation over funding levels and the government’s role in higher education, lawmakers hopefully will remember the nearly $1.2 trillion of student loan debt that’s choking our kids and holding back the economic recovery.

Here are 10 actions that Congress can take to address the student loan debt debacle it helped to create.

Broaden the federal relief programs to include all loans, regardless of origination channel (government and private), effective date, payment status (current versus past-due) or if an accommodation was previously granted. Half-way is no way to handle a crisis of this magnitude.

Restructure the distressed loans so that interest rates or no higher than the prevailing Direct Loan rate and the aggregate monthly payments don’t exceed 10% of the preceding year’s before-tax income divided by 12.  Loan durations will need to be extended to accommodate the change, but that shouldn’t be open-ended: 20 years of debt payments for a 20-year-old’s education is long enough. Frankly, these loans should have been structured on that basis in the first place, given the huge amount of dollars that are involved.

Make a tax exemption for any debt forgiveness that may result from the 20-year term limit, just as the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007 did for homeowners whose unaffordable loans were modified by the banks.

Direct the credit bureaus to expunge pre-relief student loan payment histories so borrowers are not penalized for difficulties that were inadequately addressed in the past.

Direct the regulators to relax the rules governing troubled debt restructurings so banks are encouraged to revise payment terms for distressed borrowers without concern (or excuse) for the negative financial ramifications that typically go along with this activity.

Repeal the amendment to the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 that granted private lenders the same protections against discharge that the government enjoys, without also compelling them to offer borrowers equally favorable rates and terms. Doing so will provide the proper incentive for lenders to negotiate in good faith on their unsecured loans.

Ensure that all student loan-servicing and collections companies comply with all consumer protection laws. Education borrowers deserve the same protections as any other class of consumer-borrower, especially when it comes to the Fair Credit Reporting and Fair Debt Collection Practices acts.

Establish a universal standard for the processing of student loan remittances that records borrower-payments on the dates they are received and applies that cash in this order: first to interest, second to principal and third to any unpaid fees (such as for a prior late payment). And should the value of the remitted payment exceed the amount that’s currently due, the fourth step in the cash-application process should be to credit that excess against the remaining loan balance, unless the borrower explicitly directs the servicer to issue a refund or offset a future loan payment. Servicers should be held financially responsible for the misapplication of payments to the detriment of the borrowers.

Establish minimum acceptable levels of loan-servicing performance that measure payment delinquencies and defaults, as well as customer service-response turnaround time. Loans that have been granted forbearance or deferment should be counted as delinquent and all past-due payments should only be measured against loans that are in repayment mode. That way, servicers with relatively high values of deferred loans (for borrowers still in school) are not favored and the data is more revealing. Forbearances and deferments should also be more closely monitored and benchmarked as a group so that servicers and lenders that delay loan restructurings in favor of temporary solutions that cost borrowers more (because of the capitalized interest) are held accountable.

Prohibit the transfer of chronically delinquent or defaulted loans to affiliated collections companies, or to entities with which the servicers enjoy an economic relationship (such as in the form of referral commissions). That way, no one company may doubly benefit from the servicing of any one loan.

[Offer: 10% off the Life Happens Course Book by Credit.com Contributor Mitchell D. Weiss. Your ticket to a financially savvy future.]

Clearly, these actions will amount to an expansion of the government’s role in this regard. After all, we’re talking about $400 billion to $500 billion that could make its way to the Department of Education’s balance sheet (approximately $150 billion of private student loan debt plus a portion of the approximately $300 billion of privately-owned, government-guaranteed FFEL loans that have not already been restructured). But that doesn’t mean the taxpayers should be left holding the bag. There are two actions the government can take to limit their (and the public’s) exposure.

Establish a proprietary securitization program. Why let others do for you what you can do for yourself more economically? FFEL loans are routinely securitized by financial intermediaries (such as Sallie Mae) that skim profits from the deals they put together. What’s more, the design of these transactions is intended to benefit issuers, servicers and investors, without due consideration for the needs of financially distressed borrowers—which is one of the reasons why so few of these loans have been restructured). If the government takes a principal role in the securitization of loans for which it is directly (Federal Direct) and contingently (FFEL) responsible, investors will stand to benefit from the elimination of an added layer of cost. Borrowers will also benefit because the transactions will provide for the loan-restructurings that may become necessary at some later date.

Establish a student-loan loss pool. Moving all these loans into government-sponsored relief programs will result in increased losses. That’s why it’s time for the entities that benefitted from the DOE’s largesse to give back some of what it received. An individual school’s assessment could be determined by applying its cohort default rate against the value the institution received in federally-sponsored grants and loans during the same period. A private lender’s assessment could be based upon the difference between the rates it and the government charged during the same period, as an offset to the value of the loans that move from the private lender’s books to the government’s.

No doubt these actions would inspire significant changes in behavior.

Lenders would become more circumspect in their lending practices — something that should have happened long ago. Or, as one student-borrower recently said to me: “I was an 18-year-old freshman who couldn’t get approved for more than a $750 credit card line. Yet, the student loan company gave me $25,000 to spend. On my own. I would have been better off had they turned me down.”

The schools should also plan for a more austere future.

Today’s consumers are realizing that they can no longer afford to pay for the administrative redundancies that exist between schools in close geographical proximity, nor the intercollegiate infrastructural warfare that takes the form of bigger and more luxurious sports centers and dormitories, or the capital that’s literally buried in these assets when it can be put to better use developing and delivering enhanced educational content.

The HEA has helped America to become a better educated country. Unfortunately, it also made it possible for many schools and financial institutions to help themselves at taxpayer expense. Perhaps the act doesn’t need to change as much as the manner in which it’s administered.

(Editor’s note: If you’ve had difficulties paying your student loans in the past, it’s important to understand how your payment history affects your credit. You can get a grasp on your credit standing by checking your credit reports, which you can do for free once a year through AnnualCreditReport.com, as well as by monitoring your credit score, which you can do for free using a tool like Credit.com’s Credit Report Card.)

This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not necessarily represent the views of the company or its affiliates.

More on Student Loans:

Image: Burlingham

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team