Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 238 posts

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#181

Post by jopsen »

noonespecial wrote: post #9
techsupporter wrote: post #4

> There is no expectation that the servicer will act in the interest of the consumer... Navient says its public statements encouraging borrowers to contact the company didn’t mean it would act in their best interest. So, pardon in advance for the vulgar language, but why the fuck is this OK? From any company? I'm getting real damn sick and tired of "what the big print gives, the spidery print takes away" and how we'r…

>I'm getting real damn sick and tired of "what the big print gives, the spidery print takes away" I propose "the bigger the print, the stronger the statement". Therefore, if you make one claim in 24 point and then attempt to rescind or modify it in 8 point, the 24 is legally binding because it was larger and so nullified the smaller. This also means that if you want to place limitations (like 'one per customer' etc)…

> I propose "the bigger the print, the stronger the statement". Therefore, if you make one claim in 24 point and then attempt to rescind or modify it in 8 point, the 24 is legally binding

The EU has a ton of regulation like that.. For example you can't say "free" if it's associated with a subscription or other tricks. You must advertise the complete price if selling phones with binding subscription, etc..

IMO, there is still many shady business practices to kill. But the EU is doing a great job at this.

--- Good luck in the US, maybe you should just start by targeting the payday loan industry... But not sure the current President is going to help Elizabeth Warren fix anything.

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#182

Post by elastic_church »

When public agencies push for more than kickback money, they always run the risk of being declared unconstitutional in a costly court battle that at best case undermines the agencies' budget.

The CFPB is young and they might have bat higher than they should have.

Take a page out of the SEC playback and settle for kickbacks.

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#183

Post by twblalock »

OrwellianChild wrote: post #174
twblalock wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I got my student loans, I had to do a whole bunch of online orientation. It included the various repayment plans, and even what the monthly oayment would be under each plan, and how much total interest each plan would eventually cost me. I think its a federal requirement that this information is provided before the loans are disbursed. If someone doesn't take the time to understand their student loans, which are…

I'm glad you got that coaching, but I don't think that is very universal as a practice... My student loans were handed over with the usual fine-print paperweight. I had prior knowledge of how they worked, and fortunately never had to seek payment remediation, but that's just me being lucky. I want a system that mandates supportive care of the customer (who, in this case, is not a professional financial investor, but…

I was a kid then, and if I hadn't been given an explanation of how the loans worked, I would have looked it up. I was borrowing tens of thousands of dollars, and I wasn't about to screw that up.

I always look up the terms of any loans I take, including student loans, car loans, credit cards, etc. Honestly, is that too much to expect?

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#184

Post by SolarNet »

maverick_iceman wrote: post #136
anigbrowl wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was thinking about this the other day looking at a billboard, talking about how Alive/Bob/Carol wasa winner! at the local casino, with a tiny 'play responsibly' box huddled in the corner. I don't have a strong opinion about gambling but I do care about externalities, and I was amused by the idea that some percentage of billboards (reflective of the incidence of problematic gambling) should feature Alive, Bob and Ca…

False or misleading commercial speech is not protected by the First Amendment.

Then super PACs are what again?

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#185

Post by tomc1985 »

danudey wrote: post #77
ap3 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For casinos make the odds of winning play a part in the adverts. 99.9% of the casino adds have to show people sad about losing - before we get 1 winning ad

Nah, just require them to disclose the odds for any games of chance. "Visit Golden Palace photo of a roulette wheel for a 46% chance of breaking even!"

Wouldn't that be cool if it created a competitive market where casinos advertised their house advantage?

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#186

Post by tomc1985 »

cornellwright wrote: post #149
Lazare wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yes, absolutely. We have laws banning outright fraud, setting minimum food safety standards, a lot of rules about packaging and labelling. And that's good! But we don't have any laws or expectation that a food vendor is going to be acting in my best interests. If I want to spend my rent money on 87 large pepperoni pizzas, nobody is going to arrest the guy who took my order because he didn't sit down and have a 30…

However the pizza restaurant also doesn't have anything about helping you make good, long-term financial decisions plastered all over it's website. If Navient wrote "call us and we'll screw you" then that would be fine as the customer would get what exactly what they were promised.

  > However the pizza restaurant also doesn't have anything about helping you make good, long-term financial decisions plastered all over it's website.
But they are required to list nutrition facts.

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#187

Post by tsukikage »

Lazare wrote: post #112
xkcd-sucks wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The energy drink company's interest is to minimize its cost. Years of bad behavior in this regard eventually led to pure food/drug laws, but in places with weak rule of law plenty of people are still poisoned by dodgy food.

Oh yes, absolutely. We have laws banning outright fraud, setting minimum food safety standards, a lot of rules about packaging and labelling. And that's good! But we don't have any laws or expectation that a food vendor is going to be acting in my best interests. If I want to spend my rent money on 87 large pepperoni pizzas, nobody is going to arrest the guy who took my order because he didn't sit down and have a 30…

If the food vendor straight up says in their marketing, "At Pepperoni Pizza Meister's, our priority is to help each of our 12 customers successfully manage their meals in a way that works for their individual circumstances", one might, not entirely unreasonably, argue that they should in fact have that 30 minute session with you, and are lying if they don't.

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#188

Post by developer2 »

techsupporter wrote: post #4

> There is no expectation that the servicer will act in the interest of the consumer... Navient says its public statements encouraging borrowers to contact the company didn’t mean it would act in their best interest. So, pardon in advance for the vulgar language, but why the fuck is this OK? From any company? I'm getting real damn sick and tired of "what the big print gives, the spidery print takes away" and how we'r…

Oh give me a break. The primary rule for being an adult: do not take on debt you may not be able to reliably pay back. No lender owes any borrower favors to help with their debt. If you can't afford the debt, don't borrow it. Debt isn't some magical tool to obtain free money. You're taking money from someone, with a straightforward contract to pay it back. If you can't pay it back, you shouldn't be borrowing.

The level of entitlement people have when borrowing money is insane. You're not borrowing from a family member that can be manipulated into forgiving you for being a freeloader who never pays back. Every single loan and line of credit is a serious matter - stop treating it like an externality where you get money now, completely pushing the eventuality of paying it back as "something that will magically happen". You need a plan to pay back debt. If you do not have an actionable plan to pay off debt, you have no business taking it on to begin with.

Why is debt considered "normal" in the 21st century? People are living beyond their means, trying to offload the blame on lenders, while the real fault lies entirely with the borrowers. Far too many people think that loans are just fake numbers on paper or a digital screen. No, loans are real money that you need to account for. Debt is not abstract concept that can be willed away.

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#189

Post by semi-extrinsic »

pmiller2 wrote: post #103
danudey wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, just require them to disclose the odds for any games of chance. "Visit Golden Palace photo of a roulette wheel for a 46% chance of breaking even!"

Wouldn't help. Lottery tickets have the odds of winning printed right on them, and people still buy them.

Compounding/causing this issue is people in general don't take expectation values into account - we always subconsciously overestimate the probability of a rare, positive event (winning the lottery) and underestimate the probability of a rare, negative event (dying in a car crash tomorrow).

Re: Student Debt Giant Navient to Borrowers: You’re on Your Own

#190

Post by gpvos »

FLUX-YOU wrote: post #85
iandanforth wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Billboards would be blood oaths guaranteed by the life of the firstborn of the CEO.

A controversial way to deal with generational wealth, but probably not the most controversial

A class action resulting in all plaintiffs becoming inheritors of the CEO?
Post reply on HN