Hyland v. Navient Corp.
Decision Date | 08 July 2019 |
Docket Number | 18cv9031(DLC) |
Parties | KATHRYN HYLAND, MELISSA GARCIA, ELDON R. GAEDE, JESSICA SAINT-PAUL, REBECCA SPITLER-LAWSON, MICHELLE MEANS, ELIZABETH KAPLAN, JENNIFER GUTH, and MEGAN NOCERINO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. NAVIENT CORPORATION and NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
APPEARANCES
For the Plaintiffs:
Faith Gay
Maria Ginzburg
Yelena Konanova
Margaret Siller
Selendy & Gay PLLC
1290 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10104
Mark Richard
Phillips, Richard & Rind, P.A.
9360 SW 72 Street, Suite 283
Miami, FL 33173
For the Defendants:
Ashley Simonsen
Covington & Burling LLP
1999 Avenue of the Stars
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Andrew A. Ruffino
Alexander Setzepfandt
Covington & Burling LLP
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018
Defendants Navient Corporation and Navient Solutions, LLC (collectively "Defendants" or "Navient")1 have moved to dismiss the First Amended Complaint ("FAC") in this action for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P. For the reasons that follow, that motion is granted in part. All claims are dismissed with the exception of the claim brought under New York's General Business Law Section 349.
Navient is a student loan servicer. At the heart of this lawsuit is Navient's advice to public servants about a federal loan forgiveness program that applies to certain federally-backed student loans.
There are two categories of federally-backed student loans at issue here. The first is the Federal Family Education Loan Program ("FFEL"), established by the Higher Education Act ("HEA") in 1964. 20 U.S.C. § 1071 et seq. Under that program, the federal government guarantees student loans that are fundedby private lenders ("Guaranteed Loans"). The second category is loans originated by the federal government through the William D. Ford Direct Loan Program ("Direct Loans"), which was established in 1994. 20 U.S.C. § 1087a et seq. Both Guaranteed Loans and Direct Loans are serviced by third parties through servicing contracts with the United States Department of Education (the "Department"). When a student borrower takes out a Guaranteed or a Direct Loan, he or she must enter into a Master Promissory Note ("MPN") contract with either the private lender (in the case of Guaranteed loans) or the Department (for a Direct Loan). Congress requires the MPNs for both Guaranteed and Direct Loans to be standardized.
The MPN for Guaranteed Loans specifies that the borrower will have the opportunity to choose from one of four repayment plans, including the Standard Repayment Plan and the Income-Sensitive Repayment Plan. The Standard Repayment Plan is ten years. The Income-Sensitive Repayment Plan is an income-driven repayment plan which bases repayment obligations on the borrower's income and family size. The Direct Loan MPN offers a wider variety of repayment plans than the Guaranteed Loan MPN, including four income-driven repayment plans.
Borrowers who are having difficulty making their loan payments may enter into deferment or forbearance if they meet certain criteria. These options essentially postpone theborrower's payment of a loan. Loans continue to accrue interest during the period of postponement. Borrowers will not make any payments during deferment or forbearance.
In 2007, as part of the College Cost Reduction and Access Act, Congress created the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Plan ("PSLF"). Through PSLF, teachers and other public servants may have their loan balances forgiven after making 120 on-time payments under a qualifying repayment plan -- including certain income-driven plans -- while working for a qualifying employer. Only Direct Loans qualify for PSLF. The Direct Loan MPN contains a section titled "Public Service Loan Forgiveness" that informs the borrower of the availability of this program.2 A borrower who has Guaranteed Loans must consolidate them into Direct Loans in order to qualify for PSLF. If a borrower consolidates Guaranteed Loans into Direct Loans, payments previously made on the Guaranteed Loans will not count toward the required 120 qualifying payments. Moreover, periods of deferment or forbearance do not count toward the 120 qualifying payments.
PSLF requires a borrower to verify that he or she is employed full time by a qualified public service employer by completing an Employment Certification Form ("ECF"). ECFs may be submitted at any time during repayment. When a borrower submits an ECF, the Department will verify that the borrower is on track for PSLF. The ECF must be submitted to the Department's designated servicer for PSLF loans, FedLoan Servicing ("FedLoan"), rather than the borrower's existing servicer. If the borrower's employment qualifies for PSLF, the borrower's Direct Loans will be transferred to FedLoan for servicing. Once a borrower makes 120 on-time qualifying payments, he or she must complete a PSLF Application for Forgiveness, which is also submitted to FedLoan.
Federal law provides that the Department "may enter into contracts for . . . the servicing and collection of [Direct Loans]" 20 U.S.C. § 1087f(b)(2). A private lender who originates a Guaranteed Loan may similarly contract with another entity to perform its functions under the Guaranteed Loan program. 34 C.F.R. § 682.203(a). Such a delegation does not relieve the private lender of its duty to comply with the statutory FFEL requirements and the private lender must monitor the activities of the contracting entity for compliance with those requirements. Id.; 20 U.S.C. § 1086(a).
In 2009, Navient's predecessor entered into a Servicing Contract with the Department, pursuant to which Navient is delegated the duties of the lender for Guaranteed Loans and the duties of the Department for Direct Loans. This Servicing Contract states that its "Objective" is to "[a]cquire efficient and effective commercial contract services to manage all types of Title IV student aid obligations, including, but not limited to, servicing and consolidation of outstanding debt." The Servicing Contract also states:
In the Direct Loan MPN, the Department advises borrowers that it "contract[s] with servicers to process Direct Loan payments, deferment and forbearance requests, and other transactions, and to answer questions about Direct Loans."
On its website, Navient encourages borrowers to Navient states that it "help[s] students navigate the lifecycle of their loan with: Expert guidance while in school and beyond," "Counseling as needed to stay on track with payments," and "Tools and information to explore repayment plan options that best meet their needs." Navient's advertised services include "financial literacy tools and in-depth customer service" to "help our customers successfully pay their education loans and build theircredit." Navient represents that it is
Navient earns revenue through interest on Guaranteed Loans and through servicing fees that come out of loan payments made by borrowers. When a borrower consolidates a Guaranteed Loan into a Direct Loan Navient, as the owner of the Guaranteed Loan, loses revenue in the form of interest income on the Guaranteed Loan. Further, when a borrower pursues the PSLF program, the borrower's loans are transferred to FedLoan for servicing. In that event, Navient loses income from the fees it earns by servicing Direct Loans.
The Servicing Contracts between Navient and the Department set a fixed cap on the total revenue a servicer can earn from the Department. Plaintiffs allege that this creates an incentive for Navient to increase profits by reducing costs. They further allege that the cost of compensating employees for the time and skills necessary to provide a borrower with accurate information about PSLF is higher than the amount of money Navient stands to lose from a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Edelman v. U.S. Gov't
...the contract terms clearly evidence an intent to permit enforcement by the third party in question." Hyland v. Navient Corp., No. 18-CV-09031, 2019 WL 2918238, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. July 8, 2019) (quoting Hillside, 747 F.3d at 49 (citation omitted)). District courts in this Circuit have held that......