Which is the best Stafford Lender?

<p>To my understanding you also have to pay an origination fee on top of interest so which one would be the best lender? T.H.E. with no origination fees? Or another lender who offers interesst rate reductions if you repay on time?
Also, what do they mean when they say the guarantee fees for all Stafford loans?
Thanks </p>

<p>Total Higher Education
T.H.E. offers 0% origination and guarantee fees for all Stafford Loans. All borrowers in repayment and less than 60 days past due qualify for the T.H.E. Bonus, a monthly credit equal to a 1% interest rate reduction and a 3% rebate on origination fees within six months of fully funding the loan. </p>

<p>Edamerica
Edamerica will take 1% off the origination fee for all Stafford loans. After the first 33 payments are received on time through auto-debit, borrowers receive a 4% reduction in the principal balance rebate. </p>

<p>Wachovia / Education Finance
"Triple Payback" - Receive a rebate in the form of cash or credit in the amount of 3.5% of your Stafford loan's original principal by simply choosing Wachovia each year and taking advantage of the convenience of having your loan payments drafted from your bank account: (1) Immediate 1% rebate at repayment. (2) 12 months of consecutive scheduled on time auto debit payments, you will receive a 1% rebate of your original principal. (3) At 24 months you receive another 1.5% rebate to complete the triple pay. The savings could equal up to 4.70% for Stafford loans when incentive is credited back to the original principal amount. </p>

<p>Nellie Mae
Stafford borrowers will get a 3% origination fee credit of their original loan balance to their account at repayment. To activate the Stafford loan benefits, students must register online with Nellie Mae's "Manage Your Loans" service. A credit or cash back of 3.3% is applied based on original principal amount of eligible Stafford loans after making the first 33 payments on time. </p>

<p>Citibank
Citibank Stafford Loan borrowers receive a 3% principal balance reduction at repayment. The interest rate is reduced by an additional 2% for students making the first 48 consecutive payments on time. Borrowers who sign up for Citibank's E-Z Pay to have their loan payments automatically withdrawn from their bank account can take another 0.25% reduction off their interest rate.</p>

<p>anyone please?</p>

<p>bump please......</p>

<p>They all work. All about the same. All competitive. All brand names. All must follow the government's rules. My recommendation is to go with one of the preferred lenders that your school has, or with the loan servicer/guarantor of the initial loan. File the application for the loan No sooner than 3 months prior to your first day of classes. Any prior applications are rejected automatically without notification.</p>

<p>Elizabeth, do the math. Assume a specific loan amount and figure out what the cost will be under each scenario. </p>

<p>I don't understand the THE loan can offer 0% origination fees and then later a 3% rebate on origination fees --- so you might want to get clarification on that.</p>

<p>Also, don't count on getting the benefit of anything promised based on a long series of on-time payments unless you also plan to sign up for automatic withdrawal from your checking account. All it takes is one check lost in the mail and not credited on time, and you would lose the benefits. Though I also have to say auto-debit is the best way to go -- it's one less thing to think about. But if you have high loan payments to make and your income is inconsistent, it may not be feasible.</p>

<p>they be tricksy though so watch out
we just took out a loan through Wachovia & it was sold immediately before dispersal, so while original lender had the interest break through auto deposit, the new lender doesn't even have that option</p>

<p>itstoomuch wrote: "File the application for the loan No sooner than 3 months prior to your first day of classes. Any prior applications are rejected automatically without notification."</p>

<p>Is it only true regarding federal subsidized loans, or private student loans as well, if they come from the same lender, Citibank for example? </p>

<p>So they can actually reject you even for a Stafford loan?</p>

<p>EK, if a loan is sold to a new lender, the new lender is bound by the terms of the original loan. So if Wachovia offered an interest break, you are entitled to that break no matter who has purchased the loan.</p>

<p>With a maginifing glass, I was reading some small print on the loan offers, although they offer good rates, deals, etc. it does say that they aren’t bound by that if things change.You can ask about this directly to the lender, but if they say they will offer a percentage after 36 months and then the bank changes their mind or isn’t doing well, etc. they told me they can rescind the offer. Best to look into all grey areas so you aren’t disapointed. One person told me most parents/students don’t ask, they just see the initial offer.
My co-worker recently told me after dealing with salliemae, choose anyone but them (my son did use them initially for stafford) and look at repayment options/deferment, etc. Salliemae was awful at negotiating anything when her son had trouble finding steady work. She found other agencies were better (through friends) at the “after college” years that will happen very soon.
I find the Salliemae site easy to manage, pay monthly on my son’s interest and have them take it directly from my savings acct. so there isn’t any delay. I will look into others though for further loans. Being in NJ, NJBest is an option that has low rates but they are way behind the times for internet access!</p>

<p>A PS to my last post…this for example was in the small print of a Wachovia student loan on the bottom of the page where they list the exceptions:</p>

<p>1 Future savings may vary. This benefit program may be modified or discontinued at any time without notice. Program changes will not affect loans that qualify for the benefit prior to the time of the change. Borrower is responsible for payment of applicable taxes. Earned benefits terminate upon loan default and/or loan transfer to the guarantor or insurer. Auto debit must be active by third month of repayment in order to qualify.</p>

<p>I also read this about consolidating loans on finaid.com:</p>

<p>You don’t need to consolidate to get extended repayment. A little known provision of the Higher Education Act of 1965, in section 428(b)(9)(A)(iv), allows borrowers to get extended or graduated repayment without consolidating their loans. The borrower must have accumulated more than $30,000 in federal education debt since 1998. The extended or graduated repayment plan may have a loan term of up to 25 years. Per the regulations at 34 CFR 682.209(a)(6)(ix), the borrower must not have had any outstanding federal education debt prior to October 7, 1998 at the time of obtaining a new education loan subsequent to that date. Many lenders also offer unified billing, so that you get one bill for all your loans from that lender.</p>

<p>I would recommend EdAmerica over the other lenders you listed because they have been the most consistent with their processing. They did just announce that they will have to start collecting some of the origination fees, but pretty much every lender is going to have to charge that fee if they want to remain in the game. Also, out of those lenders, EdAmerica is the only one that is still hiring new employees. The others have either put a hiring freeze in place or have started laying off employees.</p>

<p>Hi, all I choose Citizens Bank (810240)
Loans sold to and serviced by Sallie Mae.
Because I have an auto loan with Citizens bank and I can get the privite college loan from them and they will put everything on one statement.
I see here that some have had troubles with Sallie Mae is it the same if you go through a bank?
Thanks JohnG.</p>

<p>We have used T.H.E. in the past, but they have stopped processing new loans.</p>

<p>“As of April 18, 2008, T.H.E. has temporarily suspended processing all applications. We are pursuing all available avenues for funding new loans and past debt obligations. Loans approved prior to 4/1/2008 will be funded as scheduled. We plan to provide an update on or before May 15th.”</p>

<p>JohnEG,</p>

<p>From my experience, any time Sallie Mae has their hands on a student’s loan, it is dangerous. Count on losing your repayment benefits that had been offered because you can bank on your payments being received late…even if you submit them on time.</p>

<p>I have loans with Sallie Mae and I made the payment the day before it was due…however, they did not post the payment until the day AFTER it was due and then yanked my benefits. They told me that I should have made the payment at least a week beforehand if I was concerned with the benefits.</p>

<p>We use online payment with Salliemae, maybe that isn’t a good option for some, but I found if you put a date in, such as the 1st of the month and the payment, they can’t say it’s late. My niece would pay that way and my sister would sometimes do an extra payment when she could so it would keep the interest down. They might have had the posted date a few days before the due date in case of a problem.
I also use online automatic payments with credit cards, I have them take the minimum and then I add more on another day. That way, they can’t say a check got there late.</p>

<p>As others have noted, watch the fine print. Because of insider lobbying between department of education officials and some of the more powerful and less ethical loan servicing companies its not uncommon for these loans to be bundled and sold repeatedly. Often when this happens hidden fees and etc are added. So for many what’s signed when the loans taken out has no real permanence dependent on the ethics of the company involved. And without specific legal or financial training these little tricks can be hard to find.
And stay clear of Nellie Mae it’s a shadow company for Sallie Mae. And as others here have noted SM’s practices often appear to be at best unethical, and in some cases much, much worse. To the extent that several high profile politicians including Kennedy, Clinton, Cuomo have commented in open letters or have been involved in investigative commissions. Additionally, there are several very high profile consumer rights groups who have been actively concerned about SM and associated companies inconsistencies. Even the NEA has recently red flagged SM in a article about teacher training and costs. For many of the lost souls who have used SM loans, the escalating fees, and financial shell games have made it improbable that some will ever be able to fully pay. Despite good faith efforts. SM has had undue influence over most of the SL market, to the extent that their CEO has successfully lobbied to largely keep out potentially more competitive and possibly more ethical lenders. And any of the aforementioned caveats are scarcely secret information its all been covered on reputable sources like the Chronicle, On Point, and network news shows.
In short, you’d be better not taking loans if possible or waiting until there are some political reforms. The situation has reached such potentially disastrous proportions it won’t be able to be hidden too much longer.
If you have to take loans, a private bank and a personal loan would be preferable if that can be done.
And if you have to go the loan route, talk to a ethical school financial aid officer. They are out there and can give you a better direction to move. And if you find one, express your gratitude to them. Depending on the school they can be under serious pressure by their administration or various companies. Or ask some faculty-they often cannot tell you directly because of collegiate politics-but will often make leading statements which are good advice.</p>

<p>My D’s college for next year just posted a comment on their preferred lender page that said that due to the current climate in the FA market they will be delaying making their preferred lender list until May 9.</p>

<p>Well it appears your daughters school is very aware of current troubles, and perhaps is trying to correct for like troubles in the preferred lender situation that have caused scandals and troubles for other schools. The following was published in the LA times by a former reporter for the Chronicle of Higher Education and that’s about as establishment as one can get.
It would seem good schools which are concerned about their institutions best interests and reputation will be taking much closer scrutiny of preferred lenders lists. They simply cannot afford to have their schools tied to the problems, even by association. A good development as ethical schools and college Presidents might be leaders in reassessing preferred lender programs thus putting those who’ve misplaced their ethics under some pressure.</p>

<p>The Student-Loan Scam
Under a Republican Congress, For-Profit Lenders Pursued Their Own Interests — Often With The Help of Colleges.
by Stephen Burd</p>

<p>After 15 years of reporting on the student-loan industry, I didn’t think much could surprise me. But even I was shocked last week when I discovered Securities and Exchange Commission documents revealing that financial aid directors at three prominent universities - as well as a senior official at the U.S. Education Department - each had significant personal investments in a private student-loan companyWhat possibly could have motivated these officials to take tens of thousands of dollars in stock options from Student Loan Xpress? Has the whole student-loan business become so corrupt that they failed to see the conflict of interest?</p>

<p>If so, Washington is most to blame. For the last seven years, federal officials have turned a blind eye to problems with the companies that participate in the government’s student-loan programs.</p>

<p>When it came to power, the Bush administration - with its reverence for the private sector - rewarded loan industry officials and lobbyists with prominent positions throughout the Education Department. Meanwhile, lenders such as Sallie Mae have showered Republican congressional leaders with hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions each campaign cycle. “Know that I have all of you in my two trusted hands,” Rep. John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), a top recipient of that campaign cash, once famously told a gathering of student-loan providers.</p>

<p>The cozy relations that developed among the Bush administration, the Republican-led Congress and the lenders have left the loan industry essentially unregulated. Some observers liken it to the Wild West: Lenders and colleges pursue their own self-interest with little regard for students or taxpayers.</p>

<p>Every company wants to be a college’s “preferred lender,” competing fiercely to get on such lists. But the dirty little secret of the guaranteed student-loan market is how concentrated it is: Only 32 lenders hold 90% of the loan volume. What’s more, the Education Department has found that at about 300 colleges, one lender controls 99% of the loan volume - essentially holding a monopoly on those campuses.</p>

<p>Any company trying to break into the market has to rely on unconventional means. Some upstarts have promoted revenue-sharing arrangements, in which colleges get a cut of each loan that their students take out. Established lenders, worried about losing market share, have taken up similar kickback practices. One of the most egregious schemes is called an “opportunity pool,” which was pioneered by loan giant Sallie Mae. Here’s how it works: A lender hands a college a fixed amount of private loan money that the institution then can lend to students who otherwise wouldn’t qualify for loans because of credit problems. These are private loans - ones that typically come with higher interest rates and fewer consumer protections. In return for the “opportunity pool,” the college makes that company its exclusive provider of federally backed loans.</p>

<p>Soon after Sallie Mae started its Opportunity Loan Program in 2000, some of its competitors questioned whether it violated the provision of the Higher Education Act that bars lenders from offering inducements to colleges “to secure applicants” for federal loans. They brought their complaints to the Education Department’s inspector general, who wrote a memo to department leaders urging them to examine “opportunity pools.” Department officials, however, refused to take action, insisting that the loan industry should regulate itself. Many lenders took that to be tacit approval of the deals. As a result, other companies, such as Citibank, started offering similar arrangements.</p>

<p>Giving credit-unworthy students high-interest private loans is a recipe for disaster - a disaster that the department could have stopped. Loan industry officials acknowledge that these deals are “loss leaders,” meaning the companies are willing to absorb some defaults in exchange for a greater presence on a campus.</p>

<p>Recently, as outrage over these types of deals has grown and the Democrats have gained control of Congress, the Education Department has had a change of heart. Officials are considering more heavily regulating how colleges choose lenders to recommend to their students. For example, the agency may require financial aid administrators to include at least three choices on their “preferred lender” lists.</p>

<p>The department’s proposals, which are being contested by lenders and aid administrators, are welcome but unlikely to go far enough. Instead, policymakers should consider a complete overhaul of the federal student-loan programs so that college aid administrators are no longer in the business of recommending favored lenders.</p>

<p>If there can be a lendingtree.com for home mortgages, there can be one for student loans too. Lenders should bid for student-loan business. Students would get cheaper loans. And there would be fewer incentives for the kind of unseemly activity that has been coming to light.</p>

<p>Stephen Burd is a fellow at the New America Foundation, was a reporter for the Chronicle of Higher Education</p>

<p>Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Times</p>

<p>Hi, These are the preferred choices given by Marist. I have already selected Citizen bank (backed by Sallie mea) for the “subsidized” portion of the Stanford loan ($3,500)<br>
I guess from what I have read on these posting, I should forget about the convince of having both my daughters Subsidized and private loans with the same citizen bank and choose another such as “Citibank” for the private loans since I have multiple accounts with them already.
The Citibank default 1% scared me away but come to think of it, I would pick-up the payments if my daughter could not pay to protect my credit rating.
I will also look into changing from citizen Stanford, if possible once I do my Due diligence
Thanks All. John G.
MARIST INFORMATION>
Lender Information
Default Fee Origination Fee Benefits Guarantor Select
CitiBank (826878)
Loans serviced by CitiBank</p>

<p>(800)967-2400 1%Default / 3% Origination / .50% automatic interest rate reduction for on time monthly payments and .25% interest rate reduction for automatic debit payment program and the borrower agrees to receive electronic statements only USAFunds </p>

<p>Sallie Mae Education Trust (802218)
Loans serviced by Sallie Mae</p>

<p>(888)272-5543 0%Default 3%Origination
.70% interest rate reduction for automatic debit<br>
USAFunds<br>
Ed America (831453)</p>

<p>Loans serviced by EdFinancial</p>

<p>(800)337-1009 0%Default 3%Origination .60% interest rate reduction for automatic debit with continuous on time payments TG </p>

<p>Citizens Bank (810240)
Loans sold to and serviced by Sallie Mae</p>

<p>(888)272-5543 0%Default 3%Origination .70% interest rate reduction for automatic debit USAFunds</p>

<p>EG, interesting that in 1/2 of the prospective loans you noted that the SM corp are effectively controlling the situation.
That’s been one of the problems that some in academia and congress have been grappling with, insofar as these loans are often controlled by a very small but powerful contingent. And since ultimately competition is stifled that cannot a good situation for students or parents. It’s just we’ve gotten so used to it as a fiat accompli it seems normal.
The whole mess has been building up for some time, the complete article below is from 2 1/2 years back, but nothings changed all that much. It’s just the mortgage collapse, food problems are now the focus of the press.
It is difficult to get good stats on exactly how much of the SL market is controlled by a few well placed companies, but it is a unduly high percentage as indicated by the selection below. As a result the concept that parents and students can shop around for favorable loans is a bit of a chimera. As indicated by even your small sampling being essentially controlled by one large company.
Alas monopolies especially those using gov’t money are never quite as clean and pretty as the brochures would have us believe… Granted SM stocks have fallen this spring, but that was only after several years of surreal percentage increases which outpaced even Microsoft by a major margin. And the dip likely has more to do with Congressional inquiries and reluctance to continue the party…
Perhaps a better move would to buy stock in these companies rather than wasting money borrowing for education…the former probably would be a much better long term investment, albeit morally uneasy. </p>

<p>“Only 32 lenders hold 90% of the loan volume. What’s more, the Education Department has found that at about 300 colleges, one lender controls 99% of the loan volume - essentially holding a monopoly on those campuses.” Stephen Burd</p>

<p>Op-Ed Contributor
Robbing Joe College to Pay Sallie Mae
By ANYA KAMENETZ
New Orleans</p>

<p>THE higher education financing system in this country, like the health care system, is broken. In both cases, costs spiral out of control while millions of people, especially the poor, are not served. And in both cases, a few corporations are making hefty profits. </p>

<p>From the 1950’s to the 1970’s, college attendance grew along with federal student grant aid. Then, as tuition mushroomed and loans replaced grants, educational attainment stagnated. Today, those lucky enough to graduate from college end up with an average of $17,600 in loans, a burden that shapes decisions like buying a house or having children. But most young people are not so lucky - half of those who start college do not graduate at all, in part because of the financial burden of staying in school. As a result, Americans aged 25 to 34 are less educated than 45- to 54-year-olds - and more to the point, less educated on average than the citizens of several other industrialized nations. </p>

<p>The federal student aid system fails students, but it does a great job of delivering profits to private lenders, which issued $65 billion in loans last year. When it created the loan program, Congress assumed that banks would not lend to young people without extensive guarantees and incentives. So they guaranteed a certain rate of return on student loans, made up their losses on defaulters, created a secondary market for student loans by chartering the Student Loan Marketing Corporation (Sallie Mae) and allowed state lending authorities to issue tax-exempt bonds to raise loan capital. Student lending has grown into a highly profitable and low-default market, yet these special privileges persist. </p>

<p>Sallie Mae, the private company that makes, buys and sells the most student loans, boasted the second-highest return on revenue in the 2005 Fortune 500. Sallie Mae also happens to be the largest contributor, by far, to members of the House Education Committee. The Chronicle of Higher Education found that the committee chairman alone, John Boehner of Ohio, received $172,000 from student lenders and loan consolidators in 2003 and 2004.</p>

<p>It’s thus no surprise that lawmakers are apt to protect lenders and not students. On Oct. 26, Mr. Boehner’s committee approved more than $14 billion in cuts over the next six years, which would be the largest reduction in the history of the federal student aid program. Mr. Boehner defended the cuts by saying they mostly came from corporate subsidies to Sallie Mae, Bank One, Citibank and the rest. But that gets to the heart of what is wrong with this program - and the way to fix it. The best way to reverse the shocking trends in debt and educational attainment would be to switch from loans back to grants. Given ballooning deficits, though, that’s a nonstarter. Instead, why not cut off subsidies to banks and give that money to needy students?</p>