We Defend You Against

SoFi Lending, Corp.

SoFi Lending Corp., a leading US finance service provider, offers services like student loan refinancing, personal and home loans, and more. However, consumers might sometimes encounter collection lawsuits or financial issues related to their offerings.

If SoFi Lending Corp. targets you with wage garnishments, bank seizures, or collection lawsuits for any consumer debts, our firm can help. We excel in judgment-enforcement defense, especially against wage garnishments, bank seizures, and lawsuits. We offer flexible payment plans. Contact us now to defend your rights!

SoFi Lending Corp.'s New York address is 860 Washington St Art Studio, New York, NY 10014.

Types of Collection Lawsuits SoFi Lending Corp. files in New York

SoFi Lending Corp., a private student loan company, can file different types of lawsuits in debt collection in New York. These lawsuits can include:

• Judgment lien foreclosure: This type of lawsuit is filed when SoFi has obtained a judgment against a borrower and wants to foreclose on the borrower's property.
• Garnishment: This type of lawsuit allows SoFi to take money directly from the borrower's paycheck or bank account to satisfy the debt.
• Charging order: This type of lawsuit allows SoFi to attach the borrower's interest in a lawsuit or settlement to satisfy the debt.
• Repossession: This type of lawsuit allows SoFi to take possession of the borrower's collateral, such as a car or a house.

SoFi can also file a lawsuit against a borrower who has defaulted on their student loan in order to collect the debt.

Here are some additional things to keep in mind if you are being sued by SoFi Lending Corp.:

• You have the right to be represented by an attorney.
• You have the right to a fair trial.
• You have the right to discovery, which means that you can ask SoFi to provide evidence that supports its case.
• You have the right to cross-examine witnesses.
• You have the right to appeal the verdict if you are not satisfied with the outcome of the trial.

If you are facing a debt collection lawsuit, it is important to take action to protect your rights. Contact an attorney to discuss your case and learn about your options.

Pattern of Complaints from the Better Business Bureau

Consistent Account Freezing, Misinformation, and Unresponsive Customer Service

• Unjustified Account Freezing: Several customers reported that their accounts were suddenly frozen without an appropriate reason, resulting in financial hardships such as missed payments, impending eviction due to inability to pay rent, and other personal crises.

• Misinformation and False Promises: There's a consistent issue with the company allegedly providing misleading information. In one instance, a client was promised a 12-month Maturity Extension, which was later denied.

• Poor Customer Service: When these issues arise, customers repeatedly mention receiving inadequate explanations or not being contacted by the company's account specialists as promised. Some even reported being hung up on during calls.

• Unsolicited Communications: One customer noted receiving unwanted solicitations for loan refinancing, implying aggressive marketing techniques which the client found undesirable.

• Generic Business Responses: In almost all complaints, the business provided a vague response, referring to an "attached document" without addressing specific concerns in a transparent manner.

Here is the link to the complaint page of the Better Business Bureau.

Alleged Deceptive Advertising by Social Finance, Inc. in Student Loan Refinancing

Summary: The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has filed a complaint against Social Finance, Inc. (also known as SoFi) and its subsidiary, SoFi Lending Corp., alleging violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The FTC contends that from April 2016, SoFi represented in various advertising mediums that consumers who refinanced their student loans with them saved specific, substantial amounts on average. The FTC alleges that these representations were inflated by selectively excluding certain categories of consumers. For instance, those with longer loan terms with SoFi than their original student loans (who would actually pay more over the loan's lifetime) were excluded from the average savings calculations. Similarly, those with shorter loan terms (who would pay more monthly) were also excluded. The alleged misleading savings representations were both prominently displayed in advertisements and were followed by buried disclaimers on websites which did not adequately convey the true average savings.

Issue of Law: Whether SoFi's representations about average savings for consumers who refinanced their student loans with them are deceptive acts or practices affecting commerce, in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act.

Conclusion: The FTC alleges that SoFi's advertising practices related to student loan refinancing savings are deceptive. The main takeaway is the importance of accurate and transparent advertising, particularly when significant financial decisions, like loan refinancing, are at stake for consumers. The case underscores the FTC's commitment to holding companies accountable for potentially misleading advertising claims.

Pandemic Relief vs. Profit: SoFi's Push to Restart Federal Loan Repayments

SoFi, once recognized for assisting Stanford M.B.A. students with affordable loans, has now sued the Department of Education to end the suspension of federal student loan payments initiated during the pandemic.

Summary of New York Times Article:

• SoFi capitalized on nuances in federal student loan structures, attracting high-earning students with consistent repayment records.
• Post-pandemic policies enabled borrowers to pause repayments on federal loans without penalties, an act extended multiple times.
• As a consequence, SoFi experienced a 54% decrease in new student loan applications between 2020 and 2022.
• The company has shown support for President Biden's loan relief measures, yet its recent actions hint at skepticism about the continuation of the payment suspension.
• Critics view the lawsuit as corporate opportunism, while others see it as a duty to shareholders.

Conclusion: SoFi's strategic lawsuit underscores the complex interplay between corporate objectives and governmental policies. The outcome will be crucial in shaping the future landscape of student loan refinancing.

SoFi's Settlement Over Discrimination Allegations for DACA and CPR Applicants

SoFi's Financial Solutions has settled a class action lawsuit over allegations of denying loans based on the immigration status of DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) and CPR (Conditional Permanent Residence) applicants.

• Overview: The lawsuit accuses SoFi of breaching state and national civil rights regulations by treating DACA and CPR applicants differently due to their citizenship status.

• Scope: This agreement aids two groups:

  1. Non-Californian residents with valid DACA or CPR status denied SoFi loans between May 19, 2017, and Dec. 15, 2022.
  2. Californian residents with similar status and denial timeframe.

• Company Background: Established in August 2011, SoFi has financed over $50 billion in loans, with a membership exceeding 5 million across the US.

• Settlement Details: Without admitting guilt, SoFi has consented to pay an unspecified sum. The affected parties may be entitled to cash compensation for each credit rejection from SoFi—up to $1,000 for national applicants and up to $3,000 for Californians, contingent on the total claims against a $155,000 settlement fund.

• Additional Measures: Surplus from the settlement will fund the University of California Immigrant Legal Services Center, an entity supporting immigrant students and their families. Also, SoFi pledges to revise its lending policies, ensuring DACA and CPR applicants receive equal treatment to US citizens.

​

How to Contact Sofi Lending Corp.