For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
Nacho_Verde

New
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:43 pm

For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Nacho_Verde » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:09 am

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/30/busi ... wsuit.html

More than 550,000 people have signed up for a federal program that promises to repay their remaining student loans after they work 10 years in a public service job.

But now, some of those workers are left to wonder if the government will hold up its end of the bargain — or leave them stuck with thousands of dollars in debt that they thought would be eliminated.

User avatar
Stylnator

Silver
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 4:26 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Stylnator » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:16 am

Because 10 years of service are required, the first wave of qualified workers will be eligible to submit applications for debt forgiveness in October.


Where exactly is the money going to come from in October? Does the department of ed specifically have $$ earmarked for PSLF?

User avatar
SpikeSeagull

New
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 1:36 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby SpikeSeagull » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:21 am

Mr. Rudert submitted the certification form in 2012 and received a letter from FedLoan affirming that his work as a lawyer at Vietnam Veterans of America, a nonprofit aid group, qualified him for the forgiveness program. But in 2016, after submitting his latest annual recertification note to FedLoan, he got a denial note.

The decision was retroactive, he was told. None of his previous work for the group would be considered valid for the loan forgiveness program.

What changed? Mr. Rudert said he did not know. After filing a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, he received a reply from FedLoan saying that his application “had initially been approved in error.” He has not been told what the error was, and has not found any way to appeal the decision.


Well if that's not Kafkaesque I don't know what is.

User avatar
UVA2B

Gold
Posts: 3421
Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 10:48 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby UVA2B » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:26 am

Dear mother of God, this could be ruinous for a huge swath of people.

User avatar
guynourmin

Gold
Posts: 3433
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 11:42 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby guynourmin » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:28 am

Stylnator wrote:
Because 10 years of service are required, the first wave of qualified workers will be eligible to submit applications for debt forgiveness in October.


Where exactly is the money going to come from in October? Does the department of ed specifically have $$ earmarked for PSLF?


Not sure I understand the question: the department of ed is the one who holds the loans that are being forgiven, right? So they don't have to pay themselves to pay off the loan, they can just write it off or something.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29316
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:30 am

One thing to keep in mind is that this is 4 people out of 550,000 who've signed up. Also, it's crappy that they would change their mind like that, but except for the veterans work guy, the three others were employed in more lobbying/professional associations than in organizations providing direct legal services of any kind. So I don't know that people going into classic PI should be worried (at least, not any more than ever, since there's no guarantee that PSLF won't get taken away at some point).

cavalier1138

Gold
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby cavalier1138 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:43 am

A. Nony Mouse wrote:One thing to keep in mind is that this is 4 people out of 550,000 who've signed up. Also, it's crappy that they would change their mind like that, but except for the veterans work guy, the three others were employed in more lobbying/professional associations than in organizations providing direct legal services of any kind. So I don't know that people going into classic PI should be worried (at least, not any more than ever, since there's no guarantee that PSLF won't get taken away at some point).


Yeah, I don't think anyone should panic yet. If we hit October and people working in unambiguous PI positions are being told that there's no forgiveness, then we can all panic.

User avatar
zot1

Gold
Posts: 4474
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby zot1 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:45 am

I'll certify Monday so I'll report what I get.

User avatar
half moon

New
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:01 am

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby half moon » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:45 am

A. Nony Mouse wrote:One thing to keep in mind is that this is 4 people out of 550,000 who've signed up. Also, it's crappy that they would change their mind like that, but except for the veterans work guy, the three others were employed in more lobbying/professional associations than in organizations providing direct legal services of any kind. So I don't know that people going into classic PI should be worried (at least, not any more than ever, since there's no guarantee that PSLF won't get taken away at some point).

I hope you're right that classic PI people don't need to worry too much. Still, it really emphasizes the need to make sure the schools you're looking at have a plan for their LRAP if PSLF is taken away. :shock:

Npret

Silver
Posts: 1355
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Npret » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:49 am

A. Nony Mouse wrote:One thing to keep in mind is that this is 4 people out of 550,000 who've signed up. Also, it's crappy that they would change their mind like that, but except for the veterans work guy, the three others were employed in more lobbying/professional associations than in organizations providing direct legal services of any kind. So I don't know that people going into classic PI should be worried (at least, not any more than ever, since there's no guarantee that PSLF won't get taken away at some point).

The problem is being able to retroactively take away years of what people were told were qualifying employment. I don't see how that can possibly be valid.

cavalier1138

Gold
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby cavalier1138 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:51 am

Npret wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:One thing to keep in mind is that this is 4 people out of 550,000 who've signed up. Also, it's crappy that they would change their mind like that, but except for the veterans work guy, the three others were employed in more lobbying/professional associations than in organizations providing direct legal services of any kind. So I don't know that people going into classic PI should be worried (at least, not any more than ever, since there's no guarantee that PSLF won't get taken away at some point).

The problem is being able to retroactively take away years of what people were told were qualifying employment. I don't see how that can possibly be valid.


Technically, the letters were non-binding, but I'm guessing that the plaintiffs' brief uses the word "reliance" a few dozen times.

User avatar
Nacho_Verde

New
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:43 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Nacho_Verde » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:53 am

I'm wondering if the current administration could retroactively deny nonprofit groups who work at nonprofits with a political bent.

User avatar
zot1

Gold
Posts: 4474
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby zot1 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:55 am

I haven't dealt with detrimental reliance much (so my bad if this is the wrong concept to think of), but I'm willing to bet many people made career/life choices based on the promise of forgiveness.

User avatar
Nacho_Verde

New
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:43 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Nacho_Verde » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:58 am

zot1 wrote:I haven't dealt with detrimental reliance much (so my bad if this is the wrong concept to think of), but I'm willing to bet many people made career/life choices based on the promise of forgiveness.


I've seen many people taking lower t14 at sticker because of loan forgiveness.

cavalier1138

Gold
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby cavalier1138 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:01 pm

Nacho_Verde wrote:
zot1 wrote:I haven't dealt with detrimental reliance much (so my bad if this is the wrong concept to think of), but I'm willing to bet many people made career/life choices based on the promise of forgiveness.


I've seen many people taking lower t14 at sticker because of loan forgiveness.


This has been pointed out before, but if you took out federal loans, the program is referenced in your promissory note. So retroactively withdrawing a program actually seems pretty damn problematic, even if the letter certifying the program was technically non-binding.

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16642
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Rigo » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:07 pm

550,000 people. Damn.

User avatar
Desert Fox

Diamond
Posts: 18302
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Desert Fox » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:11 pm

Can't congress nuke detrimental reliance in the same act that release PLIF? It's not a constitutional requirement.

And the masses aren't going to cry tears for lawyers making more than the average person getting 200 thousand dollar subsidies to go to gold plated law schools. Esp. when you'd just be forced to continue to pay the very fair 10% for another 15 years.
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 12:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
zot1

Gold
Posts: 4474
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:53 am

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby zot1 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:13 pm

Desert Fox wrote:Can't congress nuke detrimental reliance in the same act that release PLIF? It's not a constitutional requirement.

And the masses aren't going to cry tears for lawyers making more than the average person getting 200 thousand dollar subsidies to go to gold plated law schools. Esp. when you'd just be forced to continue to pay the very fair 10% for another 15 50 years.

User avatar
Stylnator

Silver
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 4:26 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Stylnator » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:22 pm

guybourdin wrote:
Stylnator wrote:
Because 10 years of service are required, the first wave of qualified workers will be eligible to submit applications for debt forgiveness in October.


Where exactly is the money going to come from in October? Does the department of ed specifically have $$ earmarked for PSLF?


Not sure I understand the question: the department of ed is the one who holds the loans that are being forgiven, right? So they don't have to pay themselves to pay off the loan, they can just write it off or something.


Ohh, I have no idea how loan forgiveness works but I thought there is some entity that actually gets paid in the end but I guess not if it's just a write off?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29316
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:25 pm

Rigo wrote:550,000 people. Damn.

It's actually a very small percentage of people who are eligible, apparently.

cavalier1138

Gold
Posts: 4954
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:01 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby cavalier1138 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:25 pm

Desert Fox wrote:Can't congress nuke detrimental reliance in the same act that release PLIF? It's not a constitutional requirement.

And the masses aren't going to cry tears for lawyers making more than the average person getting 200 thousand dollar subsidies to go to gold plated law schools. Esp. when you'd just be forced to continue to pay the very fair 10% for another 15 years.


I mean, Congress can do pretty much anything via statute, but I have a hard time believing a court would take it seriously.

Judge: Didn't plaintiff detrimentally rely on the terms of the contract?
Defense: Yes, your honor. But as you can see, Congress told them ten years after the fact that they weren't supposed to do that. The plaintiff was retroactively unreasonable.

PAYEguy

New
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:25 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby PAYEguy » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:36 pm

The issue isn't that 4 people got screwed.
It's that the ED is now saying that its administrator's decisions are not legally binding.
That is horseshit, because they serve as the ED's agent, and obviously induce reliance.
To the extent the letters expressly disclaim any promises of future forgiveness, that's also horseshit, because this would frustrate the entire purpose of the statutory forgiveness program.
I don't know what these four people did wrong, but I'm worried that their lawsuit is going to screw this up for the rest of us.
Is TLS sufficiently organized to prepare an amicus brief?

User avatar
Pomeranian

Bronze
Posts: 263
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:23 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Pomeranian » Fri Mar 31, 2017 1:40 pm

Scary!

User avatar
Desert Fox

Diamond
Posts: 18302
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Desert Fox » Fri Mar 31, 2017 3:04 pm

cavalier1138 wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Can't congress nuke detrimental reliance in the same act that release PLIF? It's not a constitutional requirement.

And the masses aren't going to cry tears for lawyers making more than the average person getting 200 thousand dollar subsidies to go to gold plated law schools. Esp. when you'd just be forced to continue to pay the very fair 10% for another 15 years.


I mean, Congress can do pretty much anything via statute, but I have a hard time believing a court would take it seriously.

Judge: Didn't plaintiff detrimentally rely on the terms of the contract?
Defense: Yes, your honor. But as you can see, Congress told them ten years after the fact that they weren't supposed to do that. The plaintiff was retroactively unreasonable.


Yea but if congress says: that detrimental reliance can't be used wrt PLIF then it's not optional for the court to apply the law as explicitly written. Unless you have some constitutional reason. Congress can make mince meat of common law at it's pleasure.
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 12:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Johann

Diamond
Posts: 19700
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:25 pm

Re: For anyone choosing a school with no $$, b/c of Loan Forgiveness.

Postby Johann » Fri Mar 31, 2017 11:16 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
cavalier1138 wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Can't congress nuke detrimental reliance in the same act that release PLIF? It's not a constitutional requirement.

And the masses aren't going to cry tears for lawyers making more than the average person getting 200 thousand dollar subsidies to go to gold plated law schools. Esp. when you'd just be forced to continue to pay the very fair 10% for another 15 years.


I mean, Congress can do pretty much anything via statute, but I have a hard time believing a court would take it seriously.

Judge: Didn't plaintiff detrimentally rely on the terms of the contract?
Defense: Yes, your honor. But as you can see, Congress told them ten years after the fact that they weren't supposed to do that. The plaintiff was retroactively unreasonable.


Yea but if congress says: that detrimental reliance can't be used wrt PLIF then it's not optional for the court to apply the law as explicitly written. Unless you have some constitutional reason. Congress can make mince meat of common law at it's pleasure.


uhhh the law that was in place at the time. you are 1 step away from some weird conspiracy shit. judges also arent allowed to let people declare bankruptcy on student loans but they do still because justice.



Return to “Choosing a Law School?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests