Student Loan DebtUpdate: 1/5/11 see updates here for the past few months and continuing months on Student Loan Debt and the rest of the story.
Update: 11/12/10 A few questions have been answered with the new packet of documents that I received from Ed. Depart 10/18/10
- A question that has bothered me is: Where exactly and Why did the "separation date" of 3/30/88 come
about, since it was not mentioned in any of the other status change or
other documents that referenced LDA? It was pointed out to me the
other evening while examining these documents. IT HAD to be AFTER
I had supposedly received all of the disbursements. The Muir Check Request
Fax shows a "date paid of March 29, 1988" with a cut/pasted signature
that is suppose to be mine. SO, Sallie Mae had to submit this
claim package with a separation date AFTER March 29, 1988. From
what I have read they are NOT allowed to disburse loan proceeds after a
student has quit/withdrawn/graduated. I quit in Dec. 1987 after Muir Tech. failed to find a replacement instructor for my class. About three weeks of tuition earned!
- This "separation date" on Claim Reimbursement, Claim Package 7/17/90, Muir Check Request fax, and associated documents are all fraudulent and a conspiracy to conceal, cover them up ever since!
- SO where exactly doe Depart. of Ed get their
"authority" over me and this debt, IF there should even be a debt?
Certainly NOT with fraudulent documents that even counterdict
themselves. REMEMBER all of these documents came from the FILES
of Sallie Mae and Depart. of ED, where they have had them the entire 22
years that they have harassed me and ruined my life.
UPDATE: 10/20/2010 This
was the first/old Index and has been updated with new information that
is further proof of my first statements on this page.
See:Menu on Right for new "PROOF that I don't owe this debt" Claim
package Pages show grace period of 2/1/88 and 3/1/88 with first
delinquent repayment date of July 15, 1988 (5-17 days delinquent)...
That only works with MY claim of LDA as Dec. 1987, NOT Sallie Mae,
Depart. of ED's claim of March 30, 1988!
be highlighted in RED and the Red Bar on
the right side of this page, will have the new documents that I
to U.S. Dept. of Education, NCO Financial, Sallie Mae, and
any/all other parties involved. This happened on YOUR SHIFT, you are
to distribute this "proof that I don't owe this
debt" because all the other means that I have tried, all of the
letters, phone calls and investigations have failed . The
investigations were pretty funny in a way, they were kind of like
having the foxes investigate the disappearance of all the chickens,
LOL. IT would appear that reaching out to one person at a time asking
for their help with solving this, has been a gross waste of
everything, especially my time.
thing to say is "I can take 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, to
decide this" Believe you me, that they will take every last
minute of it, plus some, but MY QUESTION to them is: Just because you
can take every last minute, does it mean that you really should?
are better than one" and so shall it be,
there will be far more heads involved, than just one, this time.
anymore wasted paper, ink, postage or long
distance calls. Nor does my life allow for anymore wasted time, these
6 wks, 3 mos., etc turn into YEARS wasted.
Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Education, NCO
Financial, Sallie Mae (it happened on YOUR SHIFT!) and any/all
parties that were a party to this, that covered it up, swept it under
the rug, allowed it to happen and allowed it to continue.
have attempted to go
through the PROPER channels of disputing this student loan, as
outlined by you, since 1988, (22 years!). My last attempt was
with C. R. from the Ombudsman Office (page). After over 8 weeks of her investigating my claim (May
7, 2010 through July 16, 2010), and my supplying numerous
to counter ED Departments claim, she still sided with them in her "informal resolution" and said
and the date you withdrew
The loan period was Nov. 9, 1987 to May 13, 1988, and the withdrawal
Therefore, you attended at least 60% of the time and no refund was
due from the school.”
Claim Package shows
shows: 2/1/88 GRCE and 3/1/88 GRCE (which
was entered by Educaid/HEAF before Sallie Mae got this debt on April 5,
1988). 2 GRACE PERIODS before March 30, 1988!
- Page 8 on Red Bar Menu
- 6/25/88 Disclosure Statement
- This was suppose to have been given to
me before the loan was disbursed, so why were they sending it in June
1988... It should have been dated back in Nov. 1987 when I supposedly
got the Loan!
- 7/15/88 1st DELQ Notice
- This shows that I was already
Delinquent on July
15, 1988. Which means that my "six months grace
period" had expired and I was 5-17 days past the 1st payment due
- My payment would have been due
July 1, 1988 according to this. Grace periods #1-1st of Jan.,#2- 1st of
Feb,#3- 1st of Mar.,#4- 1st of Apr.,#5- 1st of May, #6- 1st of
June. 1st payment due July 1, 1988.
- Which would mean that my "grace
started after I quit in Dec. 1987 for the July 1, 1988 due date to be
accurate. See Grace Period definition cutout "The grace period is SIX
MONTHS long beginning the month AFTER the borrower leaves school.....
- ALSO NOTE on Claim PKG p. 8
the 06/23/88 date where it says "LTR FRM MUIR B / LDA of 030288, B in
- (Letter from Muir Borrower / LDA
of 030288, Borrower in PLUS LOAN.)
- MUIR was still attempting to
"ERASE" all the
prior computer records of when I actually quit and get more money. BUT
they still showed up as the time that they were logged in!
See LDA Dispute
Shows HEAF/EDUCAID status changes 7 of which all show that I was NOT
attending Muir Tech, in Jan 1988 and Feb. 1988!
understanding about what a LDA (Last
Date of Attendance) is, Withdrawal date and Drop date. The LDA is the
very last day that a persons butt was sitting in the classroom! The
withdrawal date is the date after that when they called to quit,
signed the paperwork, etc., the drop date is when they just didn't
ever show back up and do anything. THE LDA and withdrawal dates
pertain to me. My enrollment agreement clearly states the refund
procedure and what each term is....CAN'T THESE people even READ? Or
is it a deliberate confusing of the terms?
I have highlighted the above because
this is in direct
diction to my original copy of the Enrollment
MUIR the day I applied to attend. It clearly states
that the "official
the last date of attendance",
note any supposedly "Withdrew from school date"! That is
discussed further below in greater detail. It does NOT say, that when
I finally manage to get less pissed off, and go in to sign any final
paperwork will be the date that is used as my "WITHDRAWAL
DATE". IT SAYS LAST DAY OF ATTENDANCE, last day my butt
was sitting at a desk, in class in attendance.
help Ms C.R. with her investigation and to better understand this, I
uploaded all the pertinent documents that I had collected, up to that
time, and recently received from DOE, to my Picasa website,
where I had a previous album with a few documents that I received in
June of 2009 from DOE and the original copy of my Enrollment
received 22 more
documents from Sallie Mae in a PDF file, password protected, on June
8, 2010, I also sent some to Ms C.R. that showed the
correspondence between Muir, Higher Education Assistance Foundation
(HEAF) and the Lender (Trans World Insurance Company AKA EDUCAID)
regarding my LDA as being in Jan. 1988. Ms C.R. said she was unable
to read them and would add them to my file, well they are included
here so lets see how hard they are to read. It is true that the
"'important looking ones” have been "Blacked out" to
the point that its real hard to read them, but my point is: My name
and SS# would NOT have been on them in JAN. 1988, IF I was still
attending class. THEY only deal with status changes that occur
after a student has left school!
also sent a copy of this Muir
Agreement to Ms. C.R., after she had complained that
she could not download the documents from the Picasa site, I was not
aware of that, so I further accommodated her with more of my TIME and
sent her the documents by email!
letter goes on to read:
the loan you received to attend Muir Technical
College, is enclosed. Because the Department holds the promissory
note and other records supporting the existence of this debt, you
have the burden
The same document that is CLAIMED to be the promissory note is on a webpage here.
highlighted the “promissory note” referenced above
because it is an APPLICATION for Guaranteed Student Loan/Promissory
Note that appears to have been altered or badly written, since it is
impossible to perform under it, as it directs to do, as it is
written. More on that below.
denied “unpaid tuition discharge”, which
was again denied by department of Education.
“unpaid tuition discharge” it took over 8 months and my
calling them for their reply, before that was also denied. ALL of
these documents reference the same “promissory note and it
signed” and the same over "60% attendance".
of the Promissory Note and a copy of a
endorsed/canceled check signed by me, made out from the Lender, Trans
world Insurance Company. I have repeatedly been sent a copy of the
Guaranteed Student Loan (GSL) Application/Promissory Note (as
attached above) and finally from Sallie Mae a illegible check stamped NOT NEGOTIABLE,
amount, date, signature are all unreadable.
check, Department of ED.? I would appreciate at least seeing
that I received this LOAN, signed for it and actually cashed the
check, I would imagine that would be the first step and question. Did
I even RECEIVE THIS LOAN? OH, BTW, if you are claiming your
supposedly promissory note is the legal document, then I will
actually need a copy of TWO checks, one for $1312.00 and the other
for $1313.00 as stipulated in that "BINDING" contract the
claimed "promissory note", one with a disbursement date on
11/18/87 and the other on 12/18/87 (during Xmas break!).
10/18/10 Department of ED DID send me a more legible copy of
the CHECK with the
last documents after claiming that they didn't have it!... Very
interesting questions arise. I guess my stating that Sallie Mae had
already sent a copy most have moved them. LOL
- There is a date/stamp (6 Nov 25) that clearly shows through
from the back (reversed/upside down).... SO,
Department of ED had to have HAD this check in 2006 for that stamp to
be on it! SO, WHY if it is a LEGALLY CASHED/ENDORSED CHECK will they
NOT send me a copy of the front and back???
date/stamp show through very clearly but THERE ARE NOT ANY signatures
that also show through, it was made out to ME and Muir Tech, we both
had to sign it. MY signature was very large and bold during that
timeframe and would have easily shown through....
Letter that accompanied these 40 documents also stated, among other
things, "our position has not changed". Loyal GOV. Employees,
take the GOV. down with them...LOL
this entire 22 year period of time there was a REAL
Guaranteed Student Loan Promissory Note, that was UNSIGNED/UNDATED by
ANYONE, made out with Trans world Insurance Company as the Lender, it
shows the actual amount of the loan approved, (not requested),
repayment information, etc. there are only two signature lines on this REAL
Promissory Note, Borrower and Endorser, I will discuss this point
further along in my “proving I don't owe this debt”. There was a
copy of this REAL Promissory Note in both the files of Sallie
Mae and Ed. Department for over 22 years, I was just recently
sent a copy by both of them of this document, WHY would both of them
keep an unsigned/undated piece of paper for 22 years? I will discuss
later WHY there would have to be a unsigned/undated promissory note
in both of their files.
Sallie Mae as well as the Department of Education and repeatedly ask
(for 22 years) for documents to support their claim. These documents
have been denied me until a little over a year ago, when finally I
received some. I've requested that ALL documents with my name and
social security number be sent to me. I have finally gathered enough
that I can clearly see where the “clerical errors” occurred. It
is next to impossible to “prove” that you don't owe something,
when they won't give you “their proof that you do” to dispute.
they did NOT buy a $3,000.00 car 22 years ago, when
the person claiming that they did, will NOT give them the paperwork?
so kind to point out to me the abbreviated “warning” on
the Statement of Financial Status that she enclosed. After reading
the code, in its entirety, I believe that there is quite a bit that
will apply to my problem.
limitations on this student loan, then I would suggest that
there not be any statue of limitations that apply on violations of 18
U.S.C. 1001 (copy
attached) (I've highlighted the parts that I consider to apply to
the OTHERS in this little drama, as well). Although my understanding
is that the "holder rule" was temporarily removed from
these "trade schools" for a short period of time and mine
falls within that period of time, where I can't claim I don't owe
this due to FRAUD by the school...where is my "equal protection
under the law"?
a continuing fraud, cover up, falsifying
of documents, etc.. AFTER they left the school, nor by the lender,
guarantor or even ED Depart. and its sub contractors. So that is the
group of people I reference here that violations MIGHT apply to.
The school was LEGALLY allowed to RAPE its students and they could
NOT do anything, unless it closed within 6 months of their
quitting....WHAT about 6 months from when the complaints came in, the
investigations started? HUM When was the FIRST complaint,
investigation started? Want to answer that Ed Department? Also,
noticed you filed for your $3M. at Muirs bankruptcy, how does that
work, we can't use bankruptcy, but you can? Didn't happen to find my
check in among all of those checks that the judge ordered released
that were NOT SIGNED, did you? Might be worth a look, since it
appears that NO ONE can find the original one!
website, under “Administrative
Garnishment” to find my poverty level. I'm WELL below the
poverty level, as well as household poverty level, as it has been my
entire life, especially the past 22 years, THANK YOU! Sure glad to
find that OUT! To think that I really did believe that this office
was there to help and how foolishly I anxiously awaited her decision,
I had been forewarned but I gave her the benefit of the doubt. Just 8
plus more weeks of my life wasted on these people! BTW don't hold
your breath on getting all the "financial information"
back, I've trusted you people with far too much of my life already,
believe is the “KEY” to Ed. Departments claim is
the Lenders Request
for claim Reimbursement. Received by HEAF Aug. 24, 1990, signed
by W. C., Claims Analyst on 8/16/90. This doc states that my separation
from school was 3-30-88 . NOTE: the use of the term “separation”
versus LDA, as stated on my enrollment agreement!
the MAJOR keys to their claim (over 60% attendance), I will
address it and its flaws first by referencing the first original
document that I agreed to and signed, Enrollment Agreement Muir
Technical College, San Marcos, Ca..
front/back of my carbon copy of the original enrollment agreement
signed/dated by me, with Muir Technical College. It clearly (although
faded with age) states the total program cost $6740.00, tuition
$5520.00, refund policy and other pertinent information as will be
discussed by me.
clearly states on
the front that “I understand.... and that if I withdraw after
acceptance refunds shall be issued according to the
policy outlined on the reverse of this agreement. I
time for any
reason by notifying the college and that the official
the last date of attendance. “
states part of the refund policy. Item #5 in part. “A
trainingafter one week but within the first 25% of the
charges made by the school to the student shall be 25% of the
contract price plus $150.00..............A student terminating
training after 50% of the course, or more, there will be NO REFUND
and the student will be charged for 100% of the enrollment.”
The 50% and NO refund part, it comes into play later when in MARCH,
1988, there are documents that clearly show that: I was not
attending, because they were already discussing refunds and indeed
did refund the $4,000.00 SL loan back...OVER 50% refunded. Which
clearly puts me into the 25% completion category.
completion percentage is calculated by dividing days in school
including absences prior to the termination date by the length of
course expressed in days. Refund
Last day of attendance again!
agrees that if course(s) is subject to postponement and School
date, Student will
fees, within 15 days of
NOTE: The course
became subject to postponement when the IBM Technician Instructor
quit over Thanksgiving Holiday break (within the 60 days of starting
date). I quit at that time, but they offered me a "leave of
absences" until they could find a replacement. They NEVER, to my
knowledge found a replacement! IF ED Department should have ANY
documents that state otherwise I would gladly like to see them! A IBM
Tech. Training Instructor, there are some things that a person has to
KNOW how to do, before they can presume to teach others! OR, the
Student is PAYING for educating the teacher!
UPDATE 10/23/10 AN
interesting thing about the disbursement DATES and Trans World
Insurance Co. is that THEY claimed to disburse the SLS on Nov 17,
1987. YET on March 25, 1988 MUIR sent a Check
Request Fax asking
the SLS $3,886.87 (after FEES) check. I was charged INTEREST from
Nov. 17, 1987
($157.00) for a check/money that was not given to me or MUIR until
March 29, 1988 and REFUNDED
back by MUIR to Trans World Insurance Co. on April 14, 1988. The loan
was MADE for less than two weeks! For over 4 months (Nov. 17,
1987-March 29, 1988) they kept that money and collected interest by
loaning it to someone else, while charging me interest also....They
MADE DOUBLE INTEREST on that same money!!!!
actual attendance (LDA) was November 25, 1987 a total of 10 actual days
of training as a Computer Tech.. Because over the Thanksgiving holiday,
the after 20 years, retired from IBM as Computer Technician, instructor
quit. We were told he returned to IBM. MY tuition would have STOPPED at
this point, I was not getting the training, instruction that I signed
up for, nor with the person that I was introduced to as "Will be your
instructor, if you sign up" prior to my enrollment.
resumed on November 30, 1987 there was a fellow student that sat at the
teachers desk in the front of the room, this condition persisted for a
few days, until I went to the office and complained and quit. I was ASK
to accommodate THEM by taking a “authorized leave of absence” until
they could remedy the situation. The leave extended thru the winter
when there still was NOT a IBM Computer Technician instructor, I quit,
again. My contention is that my agreement with MUIR was breached when
they failed to provide the IBM Computer Technician instructor that I
was being charged tuition for. Even after I gave them more then ample
time to do so, so therefore Item #11 applies, it was POSTPONED beyond
60 days! So, WHERE IS MY MONEY?
request I returned in Jan. 1988 to find a man that it was quite evident
had not EVER taught anything, let alone IBM Computer Technician
courses. Does ED Department have any kind of teaching certificate on
day he hands us a quiz that he took out of the teachers edition of his
book, the quiz was not related to anything we had been studying up to
that time, we answered the questions as best we could. Next day, he
returns the quiz to us with answers that were right, but he had marked
them wrong! Several of us questioned why they were marked wrong, he
said that it made sense to him! I ask him what did his answer key say?
He ask me what was an answer key! I showed him where it was and how to
use it. He collected the quizzes and threw them into the trash, at
which point I ask him wasn't he going to regrade them and he stated
"no". I then ask him "what are our grades for this class going to
be based on then?" He did NOT reply. He told us to open our books and
read another chapter, NO instruction on parts, components, etc..
when I pulled into the parking lot, he had the class beside his car,
telling them to pull out the computer board because his electronic fuel
pump (that he had just had installed) wasn't working again. I suggested
he first check the wire on the pump, and it was indeed unplugged. I
didn't even go to class, but straight to the office and quit again, I
could not afford over $50.00+ tuition, plus child care, per day for
they suggested a solution, change my schedule to evening class, which I
agreed to, although it would mean giving up my evening job of cleaning
office buildings, that had helped support my daughter and myself. I
truly wanted to get the education I was paying for, the better job and
a better situation for my 2 year old daughter and myself.
a diesel mechanics class? If the course
was a book/lecture type only and NOT hands on, tear down, replace and
repair type course, then I would think any one that could say “open
your books” would be qualified, but NOT for a hands on training
program, experience is the only teacher of that, having done it
instructor was a MAC programmer, wearing heavy silver and turquoise
jewelry, lots of sparks if would have ever gotten inside of a computer,
his major course of instruction was on HOW much better a Mac computer
was versus an IBM. Any work on circuit boards, components, etc was
again done by a fellow student. After tolerating continuous flirting
with me, I stated to him “I'm afraid that I am NOT learning what I need
to know to repair an expensive, IBM computer” He said “ Don't worry,
everyone passes”. I then stated “Ya, but will I know anything”.
final time the week of Jan. 15th , 1988, on that Saturday the MAC
instructor came to my house to ask me OUT! I declined and told him that
under NO circumstances would I be returning to MUIR Technical College,
I called the office Monday morning and told them the same thing. I know
this for a fact because my ex went to MUIR to ask me out on the evening
(after class) of his birthday (Jan. 22) and he was told that I had
already quit, so he came to the house that I shared with my mother and
it really ticked her off! She never did like him!
Monday morning, I was told that I had to fill out a withdrawal
form (or be charged for NOT doing so) I said that I would get there
when I could.
the exact date that I finally did go and formally withdraw, I do recall
that I had to take my daughter with me, I filled out the withdrawal
form with the actual reasons for my quitting, no instructor, hardship
caused by having to change classes, loss of work, teacher asking me
out. I signed it and gave it to the office girl (Susan?) she took it
down the hall, spoke with the manager, returned and told me that it was
unacceptable, I would have to change it to read "personal" before they
would accept it. She filled another one out and I signed it or
they were going to "charge me". When we were leaving the
"manager" walked by us and said "OH, see you are going to have another
high school grad there" while looking at my daughter, I looked at him
and said "If you are an example of a higher education, I won't even
allow her to start kindergarten" and walked out. I do NOT know
what they did with those withdrawal pieces of paper, but I have not
ever seen either of them within the files that were sent to me.
Jan. 1988 LDA I have received several references to it from Sallie Mae.
There are several notification that were sent by Muir to HEAF all
indicating Jan. 1988 as my LDA (copies attached 1, ). Also a problem followup
that again states Jan. 1988 as LDA. As we
progress thru my “proving I
don't owe this debt” narrative, you will see how this date, gains a day
or two here and there and finally blooms into the absolute date of
March 30, 1988.
should morally, legally, justly owe anything for the hardship all of
this placed upon me, it would NOT be the amount demanded by them, it
should not be over 25% of the program cost. I have NOT found this
amount on any of the associated documents, ever! FAIRLY I would
consider 3 weeks of the tuition cost, 25% of books, supplies and
registration fee or about $700-$800.00 dollars, which MUIR already
received over that in payments, when they took my Pell Grant. NONE of
this was the fault of mine. I really did try!
the APPLICATION/PROMISSORY NOTE. The problems with the
“application/promissory note” (attached above) that is claimed to be
signed and claimed as proof of this debt by Ed Depart., (the first
question that comes to mind) is:
such a form as this that was being used in 1987? All references that I
can find state that a “common application/promissory note” did NOT even
come about until the early 1990's. Since this would be the first major
question, perhaps you have more information on this form used by HEAF.
I would greatly appreciate a readable copy of a blank one front/back,
or even one that has the borrower's information cutout. I ask because
the form itself is a direct contradiction of its purpose. The
instructions that are contained within it, are impossible to fulfill in
the manner indicated.
#12. Amount REQUESTED. It does NOT say amount loaned, approved, or any
other language to suggest that this is more than a REQUEST for money.
Whereas a REAL Promissory NOTE does contain that language. Amount
Loaned, Received, etc.
between Item #23 and #24 NOTICE TO BORROWER: In part reads “.........to
to me............(a legible copy of
those checks front/back would solve this one) ….I am entitled to a
copy of this Promissory Note. By signing this Promissory Note I
acknowledge that I have received an exact copy of it.” This last
part is what is impossible to accomplish with this form. I could NOT
receive an EXACT copy of it when I signed it, because the bottom
portion had NOT been filled out yet, and the bottom part would NOT have
been filled out IF I refused to sign it, because I would NOT have been
requesting a loan! Also, in the small space between item #23 and #24
“promissory NOTE” is used 7 times, kind of overkill on that one, unless
someone was trying to convince others that an APPLICATION had become a
PROMISSORY NOTE! HUM
middle section were removed and the upper right hand corner the
/PROMISSORY NOTE part were removed, there would NOT be any doubt, this
would be just a GSL APPLICATION. Which btw both parts could have just
as easily been "pasted in"...HUM, I don't see any other reference to a
"Promissory note" any where else on it. In fact Item #57 substantiates
this. Why would it want PROMISSORY NOTE STATUS, when the same form was
either signed or NOT?
portion Section B had been filed out as it is on the form now, I would
have refused to sign it! I was NOT working, I did NOT have any family
to contribute anything, AND I had a adjusted Gross income of HOW MUCH?
0. That entire section as filled out is a falsehood that I would NOT
have been a party too, nor would I have signed it with this information
on it. I don't recall EVER receiving a copy of this from MUIR.
to be deemed a “promissory note” exactly which amount would I owe under
it? The requested amount? Or item #36. Estimated Financial Aid for
Loan Period $2100.00. Also, the other two persons that signed/dated
the bottom portion, are they the Lenders that I have to pay the
requested amount back to? How do I pay them one lump sum? Or divide it
among them? OR are they the Co-signers on this “promissory note” are
they also responsible as indicated in the middle section as Co
borrower's? Since their signatures are on there also.
“promissory note” also lists two disbursement dates and amounts, so
therefore there should have been two checks that were issued and
signed/cashed by me, so where are they? If that part wasn't fulfilled
by the LENDER, would it be a breach of this promissory note and make it
null and void? Since the lender did NOT fulfill his part of the
a few more problems as I see them with this being a “promissory note”
besides the above, its the wrong school and wrong school address, just
another little mistake on a legal document that would be binding on
both parties. Was I suppose to drive all the way to San Diego to attend
class, when I enrolled in San Marcos?
Lower bottom left corner Section D To be completed by HEAF. IF this
were a PROMISSORY NOTE, then why would item #57 state PROMISSORY NOTE
STATUS? IF this were the promissory note, wouldn't the status be
apparent? It is either signed or not! NOTICE THAT this box is NOT
marked “as the PROMISSORY NOTE being signed”.
“proof that I don't owe this” is Ed Departments most precious document,
the one that ties it all together. The “you went over 60% and owe it
all” document, I lovingly nicknamed it the “C.C.E.A.C.” (Critical
Clerical Error Attempted Correction) document or “Lenders Request For
has the following problems:
moved over 700 miles from this address in 1988, in June 1988 Muir sent
a change of status report to Sallie Mae, stating my new address.
Additional moves were documented by correspondence with Sallie Mae at
Loan Servicing Center/Kansas (ring a bell? All the investigating of
this company by Sallie Mae and others in the early 1990's, did
department of Ed also investigate them? ) So, why would this address
even be on this form, when it was certainly not my MOST RECENT?
Item #17. Date of Lender Notification of Early Withdrawal. I have and
(have attached) several correspondences between the Lender and Muir
regarding my early withdrawal. This being marked N/A is “another
error”. As all of these documents were available, I got them from
of Borrower's separation from school. 3-30-88 with a check mark and
faint 5/13/88 beside it. I discussed the actual LDA above and reasons
for it. Even with the other documents that fudge it up to 3/7/88. I can
not imagine where this date came from. Does the Department of Education
happen to have a document that states I was attending class on 3/29/88?
If so, they have been deliberately withholding it from me, so, ED
Department please send me a copy, I would dearly love to see it! UPDATE
10/23/10 SEE LDA
amount of disbursement 2625.00. What happened to my refund?
The president signed a thing that we were to receive a refund on fees.
Oh, just another little error.
there come to be a Application for a GSL (that was CLAIMED to be a
promissory note) and an unsigned/undated real GSL Promissory Note, both
stamped on the back as BEING THE PROMISSORY NOTE, signed and dated.
very right section that says: “All claims must include the following
documents." MUST is the key
here. Whether they are signed/legal or not they MUST be included in
“(see original Guaranteed Student
Loan Promissory Note, unsigned/undated on front, properly assigned on
back by the "AFFIX TO BACK OF PROMISSORY NOTE" stamp).
Application. SEE TWO DOCUMENTS MUST BE INCLUDED! a Promissory
NOTE and a Student Loan Application were required to be submit with
this form to collect on the guarantee. NOT just one or the same, but
two! IF this requirement had NOT been there, I honestly believe that
the original real GSL unsigned/undated Promissory Note would have been
LOST/Destroyed long ago. Its only value was that IT WAS/IS the GSL
Promissory NOTE, that states the terms of the loan, one lender, with
only a borrower and co-signer sign/date it.
it because I didn't get the money! I was already gone or going at the
time this loan would have been being disbursed if IT EVER WAS. So show
me the checks! UPDATE 10/23/10 HERE IS
when W. C. stated the LDA, etc. she did not seem to be aware that
DURING the month of March, 1988, Muir, the lender and HEAF were already
discussing my LDA as Jan. 1988 and the amount of money to be REFUNDED,
because I did NOT attend over 50%. So my question would be, why would
they be doing this if, as W. C. Claimed I was still in school until
3/30/88 and attended over 60%?
this document, the one from Ed Department is
NOT signed/dated, and the one from Sallie Mae is
supposedly by me, BUT I really suspect that I did not sign
it, since it is MY COPY and the original is NOT signed that is the
Lender copy! HUM, more mystery. Good ole Sallie Mae gets the job done,
one way or another! But then my "signature
also appeared on the Check Request Fax of March 2 - April 14, 1998 on
the very left bottom... but most of it wasn't there! Cut and paste! I
had moved over 700 miles away when I supposedly signed that one! But my
withdrawal form that I did sign has NEVER shown up anywhere!
I do have far
documents and comments should you feel the need for either. Now to
put some of the pieces together: You may view the documents on
the slideshow above or use the menu bar with descriptions of each.
Comments will just flow on their own LOL.
College, San Marcos, Ca. Ring any bells? I never really figured out
whether the US Attorney won this case or not! I'm sure that a search
of court records from about 1988 onward would reveal quite a few
investigations, charges and trials with all the key players in this
little drama. I came up with the following and a few more quite
quickly. There was also investigations by States, Accreditation
agencies, and a bankruptcy in 1989.
BTW J.S. that is
accused/tried in the following case, signed one of my documents. Case
et al Date
filed: 02/22/1994 Date terminated: 02/05/1996 Date of last filing:
02/05/1996 Muir Technical College, Inc. (1) Office: San Diego Filed:
02/22/1994 County: San Diego Terminated: 04/10/1995. Of course,
since the "holder rule"
was suspended, I can't do anything about that! I have added some of
the cases, to the “reading room” link on the menu bar. It
also will contain a list of all documents referenced here and others
that are part of my growing collection.
There are also
multiple newspaper articles about Muir and 200 students filing class
action against them, Instructors testifying against them, etc. these
are also in the “reading room”.
So, was MUIR a
reputable school that could be trusted to NOT alter, change, falsify,
fudge on documents, if it meant more money for them? Can you honestly
answer Yes Ed. Department, that they were reputable and would NOT do
that? After all it was ED Department that investigated/tried them!
Ed Department vigorously defends Muir for the defense as a reputable
school that would NOT falsify documents, alter them. Then Ed
Department provides testimony and court records to prove it didn't
waste taxpayers money when it prosecuted Muir... Which is it good
attaching the “request for check” fax dated March 2, 1988, that has
clearly been cut/pasted three times. This document also shows that MUIR
collected over $7,000.00+ (well over the agreed upon contract
price/program cost) which would have more than paid them for anything I
could have possibly owed them. (document attached)
Sallie Mae, (10/18/10
UPDATE: SHOWED UP 4/5/88, according to Claim PKG readout.)
I really don't know how/when she showed up in this, since
my loan was with Trans world Insurance Co. IF INDEED I SHOULD OWE
anyone. But what about all those investigations going on especially at
Loan Servicing Center/Kansas, the SAME TIME that this C.C.E.A.C. was
all going on. For the new comers that don't recall all the excitement
of the 1990's and Student Loan investigations. I've included some of
the links in the “reading room”.
Department Still want to claim my loan papers were in a “Safe, honest,
reputable place?” When the document that came from there has already
been shown to be full of LARGE HOLES.
whoops went out of business, no help there. Would have been nice to
been able to get what documents that they might have had to shed some
light on this.
in the amount claimed, nor the amount ever
claimed. I will NOT ask for “forgiveness” of this loan, because it is
MY forgiveness that should be sought. I have tried to overlook this and
write it off as “clerical error” and someone covering their behind in
order to keep their jobs. But there has to be an end to it. Based upon
the proof as outlined above, I have taken the following steps to
resolve this matter once and for all.
sending a “Demand for
overpaid funds collected thru IRS Federal Tax offset” plus accrued
interest at the same rate that was charged me, to NCO and ED
Department. The deadline is September 1, 2010, at which time IF the
total refund is not in hand and a legal PAID IN FULL declaration, that
relieves me, my heirs, estate and anyone associated with me, of ANY
further obligation whatsoever under this asinine absurdity, I will file
for Judgment against the above and seek actual, punitive and any other
damages I can get to go with my refund. Since I'm NOT an attorney, I
will have those attorney charges added as well.
afford to let this slide, my grand babies might want to go to college
someday, I would turn over in my grave and scream for an eternity, if
they were forced to endure the same that I have. Its on my shift and
its my job to stop these kinds of “clerical errors” and I will.
the Inspector General does decide to investigate once again, they might
add the investigators to their list of those to investigate, since it
would appear that I have investigators, investigating the other
investigators that investigated it in the first place... 22 years of
investigation is 20 to many.