I was 2 months behind on my student loan and called to make a payment to bring me current. She told me that I didn't have to pay anything right now because my loan was in forebearance. I asked her what this meant and she said they got notice that I was filing for Chapter 7 and no payment is due until discharge, at which point, they will send me a bill. She was super nice and told me that they aren't even allowed to send me a statement or contact me regarding the loan but if I every needed to ask a question I should feel free to call. I didn't know that happened with student loans!
-
-
Me neither. I think that's interesting.
BTW, most interesting SL case was just heard by the SC. I will be curious to see what the decide. There is a potential huge impact on pro se filers with SL. We'll see.So the poor debtor, seeing naught around him
Yet feels the narrow limits that impound him
Grieves at his debt and studies to evade it
And finds at last he might as well have paid it. -
keep paying. They will sock you will the full amount past due as soon as they are allowed to.Comment
-
And interest continues to accrue, so the balance will be a nice suprise if you let it sit 5 years with no payments. Keep paying. They will accept it, just not send you a bill.1/15/10 Filed ch7 2/18/10 314 meeting
2/22/10 Report of No Distribution
4/20/10 Discharged 5/20/10 Closed!Comment
-
I heard nightmares (unverified) about "keep paying." In some cases, the monmey goes into some type of account but doesn't get credited against the account. It just sits there until the 7 or 13 is discharged; growing interest all the time.
Can someone reference the SC case?Comment
-
Having read the transcript myself I disagree with the post slightly. I think it was clear that Ginsburg did think the lower court got it correct but she and maybe Stevens are likely to be the only people who see it that way so I don't think that's going to carry them far.
I think the voidness issue is more damning. The problem for the SL companies is that it doesn't really solve their on-the-ground problem. Because if the court upholds the claim as void then the SL companies will still need to look over all the cases anyway, which is what they don't want to do.
I thought Scalia's take is most interesting. Hold the lawyer accountable for not requesting a hardship hearing. He's an officer of the law; let him be held accountable for knowing the law. That sounds well and good but where does that leave pro se filers. How can you hold them accountable for knowing the law at this level of detail? If Scalia gets his way anyone with student loan debt should file pro se and hope that they get a sympathetic judge to discharge it (without the normal hardship hearing).So the poor debtor, seeing naught around him
Yet feels the narrow limits that impound him
Grieves at his debt and studies to evade it
And finds at last he might as well have paid it.Comment
Comment