Search News


Browse Archives

News

Student Loan Potpourri

December 9, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Monday felt like the old days -- all the way back in early 2007, when news about student loans flew so fast and furious that it was almost hard to keep up. It probably felt that way, in part, because New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo reared his head again in the student loan arena, announcing a $675,000 settlement with the College Board over its now-abandoned loan practices.

That agreement, which followed a finding by Cuomo's office and Connecticut's attorney general that the College Board had given discounts on some of its financial products and services to colleges that placed its loans on lists of "preferred lenders," was one of several student loan-related news developments Monday.

To wit:

  • Significant numbers of for-profit colleges say their students have had trouble paying for college because they lack sufficient financial support, and 70 percent of the institutions say they have seen increases in students registering for classes but not showing up, according a survey released Monday by the Career College Association. More than half of institutions responding to the survey say they are providing their own loans to students to try to close the gap between their federal aid and the students' cost of attendance.
  • A new report by the Institute for Higher Education Policy and Excelenciain Education takes an in-depth look at those undergraduate students who are least likely to borrow to finance their educations, analyzing not just who they are (older, financially independent students, part-time students at community colleges, and members of certain ethnic or immigrant groups) but how their decisions affect their chances of succeeding in college (the impact is not good).

Cuomo and the College Board

When the College Board announced 16 months ago that it would no longer originate federal or private student loans, its officials hoped to bury questions about whether the admissions and financial aid giant -- which is a trusted source of information for students and parents about college -- might have conflicts of interest in profiting from private loans that its own analysts decry. But the inquiry by the New York and Connecticut attorneys general -- while asserting that the board ceased its private loan operations "for reasons unrelated to the investigation" -- suggests another layer of problems with the College Board's now-defunct loan programs.

The investigation found that the College Board "gave significant discounts" on the products and services it provides to college financial aid offices (such as the PowerFAIDS software system and CSS/Financial Aid PROFILE) to "certain colleges in exchange for placement of the College Board’s loans on the colleges’ preferred lender list of student lenders," Cuomo's office said in a news release. In at least four instances, Cuomo's office said in its 45-page settlement agreement with the College Board, the board gave discounts of between 6.3 and 24.6 percent off the price of the financial aid products, saving the institutions a total of $79,000, in exchange for being placed on the colleges' preferred lender lists.

The Cuomo settlement states that the College Board's federal loan volume (and, in turn, its profits) from the four institutions in question increased by a combined total of $130,000 after the preferred-lender agreements were in place.The settlement asserts, as did all of the many such agreements that the New York attorney general signed with lenders and colleges during his yearlong investigation into student loan practices, that the College Board violated New York business law.

“Loans are hard enough to come by these days; the last thing we need are deceitful arrangements like this one that stand squarely in the way of students and parents getting the facts,” Cuomo said in a prepared statement. “We should be doing absolutely everything we can to guide students to the least expensive, least complicated option for affording higher education. With their national reach and extensive expertise in higher education, College Board is the perfect entity for helping students and parents borrow smartly.”

The board did not admit any wrongdoing in the settlement, and its officials said in a prepared statement that they were pleased that the settlement is "forward-looking and focused on how the College Board can best serve students and families as they prepare to finance their college education."

Under the settlement, the board agreed to invest $675,000 to create a set of tools to help students and financial aid officers compare student loan offers, and to provide the tools free for the next two financial aid cycles. The College Board has also agreed to create two student loan calculator tools. One calculator will help students and parents compare offers from different lenders. Under the other, the College Board will create a model "request for proposal" for colleges to use to find student loan providers, and then will let colleges use the information collected through the model RFP to provide "individually tailored advice about the terms available to particular students from particular lenders," the attorneys general said.

"These new services and tools will be especially valuable in the current economic situation, when students and their families are finding college financing increasingly difficult to obtain, loans are becoming more scarce, and families experience financial hardships," the College Board said in its statement.

Career Colleges and Loans

At times alone among higher education officials, administrators at for-profit institutions have been complaining that the student loan credit crunch is serious, and that it was affecting student access to college. Seeking to buttress anecdotes with data, the Career College Association, on the eve of an investment conference about postsecondary education in Washington, said a survey of 90 of its members, representing about 600 campuses, had found that significant numbers of students were having trouble closing the gap between available federal aid and the cost of college.

The association's survey asserts that nearly 70 percent of the responding institutions have seen an increase in the number of "no shows" -- proof, the career college group says, that "the gap in tuition financing has had a noticeable effect on the number of students pursuing postsecondary education."

About three-quarters of the institutions said that their students use private (or "alternative" loans) to close that gap, and that 42 percent use loans they receive from their own colleges, which are increasingly stepping up to try to close the gap. The association's survey found that 12 percent of responding colleges were offering institutional loans to all of their students, and that 45 percent offer such loans only to students who cannot obtain private loans to fill the gap. The size of the institutional loans varies, the association said; "17 percent say the average amount of institutional loan is less than $1,000; 15 percent say it is $1,000 to $2,000; 13 percent say it is $4,000 to $5,000; 6 percent say it is $10,000 or more."

“The private student lending market has almost disappeared, except for an economically elite few, as a result of the global credit crunch," Harris N. Miller, the association's president, said in a statement. "We are pleased to see that, in a time when students are having enormous difficulty obtaining the financing necessary to earn a college degree, our educational institutions are being proactive in ensuring lines of credit continue to flow by using their internal resources. Nontraditional students are particularly hard hit by harsh economic times, and this action on the part of many schools cushions the blow."

No information was available on how the rates of the institutional loans compare to those of private or federal loans.

Worries About Those Who Don't Borrow

While there are significant concerns among many policy makers some college officials about students who need to borrow and can't, or those who borrow too much, the report released Monday by the Institute for Higher Education Policy and Excelenciain Education focuses attention on another group: those who forgo borrowing and maybe shouldn't.

The groups' thesis, in "Student Aversion to Borrowing: Who Borrows and Who Doesn’t," is that by not borrowing, some students may be limiting their college choices in ways that are damaging, and that others may be hurting their chances of completing college. Among the report's findings:

  • In 2003-04, Hispanic and Asian students were less likely to borrow than their white and black counterparts -- 30 percent and 25 percent, compared with 35 and 43 percent, respectively. In addition, immigrants were less likely to borrow than native-born students. That is true even if they have substantial remaining financial need after receiving federal, state, or institutional grants.
  • Borrowing trends to pay for college have changed over time. In 1992–93, only 20 percent of
    all undergraduate students took out a loan, and very similar levels of white (19 percent), Hispanic (18 percent), and Asian students (18 percent) took out loans. In 2003-04, 35 percent of all undergraduate students, 35 percent of White, 30 percent of Hispanics, and 25 percent of
    Asian students took out a loan to pay for college.
  • Over all, students who did not borrow in their first year of college despite remaining need of at least $2,000 (after grants) were somewhat more likely than borrowers to have left college without a degree after three years: 36 percent compared with 31 percent. Non-borrowing Black and Hispanic students with remaining need who started college in 2003-4 were considerably more
    likely than borrowers from the same racial/ethnic groups to have left school without a degree by 2006.
See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Student Loan Potpourri

  • Shame.
  • Posted by Alan Collinge , Founder at StudentLoanJustice.Org on December 9, 2008 at 7:05am EST
  • Shame on the College Board. They jumped into the loan business for, what? 6 months? Apparently they wasted no time in entering into illegal arrangments with the universities.

    That's got to be some sort of record. I hope their spokespeople aren't asked to testify befor Congress in the future. They're obviously no friends of the students.

    Shame on the Career Colleges. The private loan horror stories I have been receiving from these schools are astonishing. Perhaps if they would lower their prices to reaonable levels, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

    Shame on that slanted study which tries to scare the students into borrowing.

    When are you people going to finally get it? The citizens are sick of borrowing. Comprende'?

  • Beware of ANY school that offers its own loans!
  • Posted by kgotthardt on December 9, 2008 at 7:55am EST
  • Who regulates loans when the school is the lender? The answer: just about no one. Fees, interest, and collections, when in the hands of a school, can be administered in any way a school feels fits. Who will know, for example, if a college collections officer walks into the classroom, embarrasses a student, and pulls him/her out of class in front of peers? No one. And the student has no one to complain to as s/he might if there were federal funds and oversight involved.

    Some of the school-as-lender contracts are so loosey-goosey, the college can literally change the rules mid-loan. I am not saying to trust any lender at this point (history has shown us, via bailouts, none of them can be trusted), but I am saying some of these career schools in particular take advantage of already disadvantaged groups who are looking for a quick way out of poverty. Some of these "colleges" serve merely as accredited loan-sharks.

    Additionally, since admissions officers get penalized for "no-shows," career colleges have an extra incentive to sell loans any way they can. It's self preservation in a predatory industry.

    Lenders are worried people aren't borrowing? Perhaps they should examine the return on investment. How many of these students are able to work beyond their debt load once they graduate, if they DO graduate? Let's not forget those who drop or flunk out--they are still left holding the bill. What happens if they "default" on a school-as-lender loan?

    Consider this as well: students who take out loans like this cannot FOIA their records (since most of these career schools are private). Any request for records can go ignored, and most students cannot do a thing about it. The accreditors certainly won't do a thing about it, as they don't want their fellow accreditation buddies to get into trouble. Students who don't receive what they were promised have no consumer protection. These schools have the lawyers. Students generally do not.

  • Student Aversion to Borrowing
  • Posted by justaguy , parent & taxpayer on December 9, 2008 at 7:55am EST
  • Maybe I'm in the minority, but I think an aversion to borrowing for college, or anything else, is a good thing. It seems that the report is more a marketing study aimed getting "customers" to buy more and better product than a attempt to assist students in college and beyond. The argument that not borrowing may limit college opportunity must be balanced against the long-term effects of debt. Davidson College recently eliminated loans from their financial aid packages. In doing so one of the reasons cited by Christopher J. Gruber, vice president and dean of admission and financial aid, was, "we know that these students often graduate with a burden of debt that limits their choices in career and post-graduate education."

  • Posted by collegeloanconsultant on December 9, 2008 at 8:25am EST
  • It makes sense for colleges to offer their own financing to fill the vacuum left by the departure of private lenders. It is a more economical way of competing for students than building new dorms and these programs are a self-sustaining type of financial aid.

    Many of them already were in place (although they were not overly publicized).

    University student loans

  • Averse to Loans
  • Posted by Joseph_K , Mr on December 9, 2008 at 9:15am EST
  • I would not recommend anyone borrowing money to go to college, unless you're absolutely totally confident you can finish. And not only the confidence to finish, but confident that a pretty high-paying job awaits you at the end. I went to one of those "career colleges," one that gets you an associate's degree and assists you in finding a job. It didn't work out. The college wasn't even really respected, when it comes down to it.

  • "student loan potpourri"
  • Posted by n on December 9, 2008 at 10:10am EST
  • What a nightmare.......
    Really, the College Board and all universities and career colleges involved that got "perks" for being preferred lenders" etc. should all be investigated.
    Especially since it was all illegal......
    how come no one is paying the price so far accept the poor students who got sucked into all of this for just wanting to better their lives?
    How? and WHY? are they allowed to get away with this stuff?
    How come it hasn't been investigated further?
    Inquiring minds want to know..........

  • slanted ending
  • Posted by jen on December 9, 2008 at 10:36am EST
  • This story went sour at the end in describing worries about those who don't borrow. The statistics used show such a small percentage difference in students who drop out of college that it is barely significant and could be due to other related socioeconomic factors and likely manipulated.

  • The College Board's Practices
  • Posted by Parent and College Administrator on December 9, 2008 at 12:10pm EST
  • Should The College Board have been let off so easily? What they did was push loans onto students in an opaque and unethical way. They encouraged and enabled colleges to use the CSS Profile information and PowerFAIDS software to create Institutional Methodologies to override Federal Methodology, customarily resulting in more need for students to borrow. Then The College Board invited colleges to refer borrowers to them, in turn discounting the cost to colleges of the products that made it all possible. Some might say this is a good business model; others would conclude it was a racket that deserved prosecution for deceptive practices.

  • Look at borrower age and fiscal expertise.
  • Posted by Heather Shipley on December 9, 2008 at 12:10pm EST
  • Giving an enormous loan with undisclosed pitfalls to a still-wet high school graduate is unethical. Laws must be changed.

    Saying that a girl in a short skirt "asked for it" is saying the rapist was not culpable. Saying the kid asked for the loan is no excuse for predatory lending practices and incomplete disclosure.

  • Corruption in private student lending
  • Posted by Chris on December 9, 2008 at 1:35pm EST
  • How about the 2 year for-profit trade schools that rush students through the admissions process and force them to sign papers and sign up for private student loans. These are the same schools that only provide one source, and tell students only their preferred lenders are accepted for funding. Before we know it, we've signed up for $45,000 of private student loan debt without understanding what private loans are, how they can be repaid, and furthermore, how we can pay back the ridiculously high interest rates even after graduation, regardless if we have a job. Private student loans are the cause of the most painful kind of debt for college graduates, the kind that we cannot afford to pay, that the government provides no options to help us get out of debt. Wall street gets bailed out, the big 3 auto makers get bailed out of debt, how about helping the educated workforce of America? More money in our pockets means more money in the economy, it seems like simple economics, yet those of us with astronomical private loan debt, who's principal amount increases every 4 months because of the capitalized interest because the federal government will not buy out private loans. If students were disclosed any of this information at the time of sign up I sincerely doubt many of them would actually go to school knowing that private loans are the only way to fund their education.

  • Yep, lenders are the only ones to blame....
  • Posted by Financial Analyst on December 9, 2008 at 3:15pm EST
  • Nevermind that schools have increased tuition rates astronomically. Nevermind that the FFELP limits don't come close to covering the actual cost of a degree...

    Blame the lenders.

    Lenders have competed for loans in a marketplace that is manipulated by the schools and by the government as well. I'm not sure what specific action continues to earn lenders the title "predatory". Schools came up with the idea of "preferred lender lists".

    It takes two to tango, and the schools turned a blind eye to the bribes and kickbacks. In fact, to be able to offer loans at many schools, it wasn't a matter of how competitive your loan terms were at all. It was about how much money or free stuff was given to the financial aid administers. All along the way, the federal government has done very little to make college more affordable. Lowering an interest rate might save kids a few bucks, but why is it that tuition costs so much in the first place? And why are schools not being hammered for perpetuating these practices?

  • don't borrow
  • Posted by Linda on December 9, 2008 at 3:15pm EST
  • As an older student, who went back to school later in life, with the help of school loans; I have this to say. I have been paying back loans for the last 10 years and will be paying back for at least that much more as I have not yet reached the half way mark yet in repayment. I have never defaulted. Periodically, I end up with little chunks of capitalized interest and have stopped trying to figure how I could have done anything differently to avoid that. My bigger concern is how long it is taking to pay back the loans.

    Overall, school loans are too risky with no consumer protections. There are not other loans that have this high risk. My suggestion to all new students out there is don't borrow or borrow very little, for college. My thinking is that school loans are in the best interest of the schools that have in interest to bring in as much money as possible and in the best interest of the loan companies.. And those two entities feed each others interests, one offering an unlimited amount of money and the other have a never ending need for it. Having said all that I am appreciative for the college education and those life experiences. But, it is much less stress to either take 10-15 years to work your way through college or as some of my friends without a family to tend to; work a job while attending school. It would have been nice to take part in much more of the social activities and fun than I did...but that was not the priority, my education was. So I'd suggest and I wish I could get the word out better to new students, to work as much as possible either before attending or while attending school and work your way through with very minimal loans. These kind of loans can have a way of turning your life upside down if your life and career hits any bumps in the road after you graduate.

  • Students Should Avoid Loans if Possible
  • Posted by Philip Contini on December 9, 2008 at 5:20pm EST
  • Wow. Now more than ever, students need to avoid student loans. I know the job market is tough, but there are usually ways to work on or around campus. If a student must borrow, they should never go beyond the federal loan programs unless they will graduate with a degree that guarantees a high salary after graduation. And students really need to work to find grants and scholarships. Every student should become familiar with fastweb.com, mappingyourfuture.org, scholarshiphunter.com and scholarships.com. Get that free money if you can!

  • Student Loan Potpourri
  • Posted by EllenFR on December 9, 2008 at 7:25pm EST
  • Beware of Student Loans!
    Not all graduates land high paying jobs after graduation. Plus, you never know what life might hand you.
    I never expected to be defaulted on a PHEAA Student loan while on Family Leave to care for a family member dying of cancer, but it happened to me. Of course, bad credit leaves very few options when applying for jobs.So, I took what I could, which turned out to be very low paying jobs.
    The collection agencies that are used by the Student Loan industry would put the Mafia to shame, because they are able to use tactics that are against the law for other types of collections...like credit cards. Also, please beware that there is no consumer protection, and bankruptcy is out of the question...even if you became disabled.
    Yes, they will garnish disability payments, workers' comp, and even Social Security. They take away income tax returns, and although they want to get paid, they prevent people from securing employment.
    If I had to do it over again, I wouldn't have borrowed a penny to go through college. It would have been much better to work and to have attended part time.
    This is just a warning!

  • Student Loan Debt
  • Posted by Manuel Mejia , Educator at A Florida Middle School on December 9, 2008 at 10:15pm EST
  • In this age where the median income for most Americans is falling, piling up student debt (especially private debt) in hopes of paying it off in a short amount of time after graduation is very risky. This is especially true for those students who tried to get a better job through a graduate program. Even the U.S. engineering field is under pressure to cut wages due to offshore workforces. Many graduates are in a position where they never earn enough to pay the debt and do other tasks such as buying a new car, house, or travel. If they do manage to pay the debt, it takes decades to do so. Prospective college students need to beware. Too much debt and the problems that it can bring may make a bright career future look rather dim.

  • Posted by Dee on December 10, 2008 at 5:20am EST
  • It's the smart ones who are afraid of borrowing. To leverage one's future under the terms of a student loan REQUIRES both stupidity and ignorance - a very dangerous combination. No one who's got the intelligence for post high school vocational training or college would knowingly - with knowingly being a very important key word - sign student loan papers with how all consumer protections have been removed, how the loans can now haunt you for the rest of your life no matter how hard you try to take care ofthe debt and how the various involved entities take advantage of this to through all ethics out the window.

    Had I had the slightest clue what really hid behind them, I never would have gotten a student loan. Borrowing on credit cards would have been cheaper and friendlier. I tell all my friends and their children about what I've suffered due to an unexpected disability and strongly advise all to do what they can to avoid or at least minimize their loans.

  • Student Loan Dischargeability
  • Posted by Chris Young on December 10, 2008 at 5:25am EST
  • This a great report written by the National Consumer Law Center that shows support to "Restore a Statute of Limitations" as stated on page 40 of the document below. NCRC also supports making The Student Borrower Bill of Rights section (c) retroactive as discussed below. This is a great read!

    "No Way Out," a report written by the NCLC
    http://www.wheretovote.com/nowayout.pdf

    The most favorable legislative change NCRC supports is to overturn the elimination of the student loan collection statute of limitations in 20 U.S.C. Section 1091a(a)(1) and replace it with a time limit (or
    statute of limitations), presumably a ten year limit. (Note that prior to 1991, the time limit was six years.
    However, it might make more sense to align the Higher Education Technical Amendments time limit with the time limit of ten years in the Debt Collection Improvement Act).

    NCRC wants to attach the below text to put it in as a separate bill or fold it into another bill. We want to amend 1091a(a)(1) as follows :

    Obligations to repay loans may be enforced at any time during the ten year period following the date of default. This ten year limit on enforcement is to include debt defaulted before and or after the date of
    enactment and applies to all actions to enforce or collect the loan obligation, including filing of lawsuits,
    enforcement of judgments, any and all administrative offsets, including those authorized by 31 U.S.C.
    3716, garnishment, or other action initiated or taken by-
    AND HERE THEY CAN KEEP THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT IS IN 1091a(2)(A),(B),(C), (D).

    The second main point we are trying to address is basically the way the Student loan law reads now. No one will be able to use this section (c)until 7 years have passed, in the best case scenario, from the date of enactment of the Student Borrower Bill of Rights. Adding the term "before and or" after the date of enactment..... will help those who are currently in this debt crisis to retroactively use this criteria of having a seven year old debt before and or after the date of enactment. Also, by adding these words it shows the congressional intent.

    We would like you to suggest to Hillary's office to add these words, or to add them as an amendment.

    of bill
    ‘‘(C) such debt is for an educational loan made, insured, or guaranteed by a governmental unit, or made
    under any program funded in whole or in part by a governmental unit or nonprofit institution, after the
    date of enactment of the Student Borrower Bill of Rights Act of 2006 and such loan first became due more than 7 years (exclusive of any applicable suspension of the repayment period) before the date of
    the filing of the petition;’’.

    We want to add "before and or" to the original text to make the congressional intent for the legislation
    retroactive.

    The retroactive issue is most important to our organization. Our organization has it's own agenda to directly push the 10 year statute of limitations and the 7 year bankruptcy language. We will not support
    legislation that is not retroactive for both of the issues cited, as tens of millions of people are suffering right now with this debt crisis and can't wait 7 years after enactment. As this language stands, no one
    will be able to use this important bankruptcy reform for 7 years. We want people who have 7, 8, 9, 10 ...
    Year old debt retroactively to be able to have this debt discharged. Who is to say that the bankruptcy code won't be changed back within that 7 year period by the next incoming congress? It's too risky not
    to go for our real goal here. We are not in this to make anyone just "look" like they are making a serious reform.

    Chris Young
    National Civil Rights Coalition
    401-284-0951

  • PREDATORY LENDERS!
  • Posted by M V on December 10, 2008 at 7:20pm EST
  • Private student loans are just as corrupt as the risky mortgages that forced hundreds of thousands into foreclosure. They were lending money to people they knew would not be able to pay it back. I was allowed to borrow over $90,000 in Private loans all before I was 23 - I had no job, very little credit and was getting a degree in a career that is know to make a very modest salary. I am now over $135,000 in student debt with no way out. The governement bailed EVERYONE out except the student loan borrowers. Return bankruptcy protections to Private Student Loans and help those who are drowning!