ShareThis Page
Pennsylvania

Feds go to bat for Pennsylvania loan agency

Debra Erdley
| Wednesday, Jan. 10, 2018, 6:18 p.m.

The federal government went to bat for the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency Wednesday in a Massachusetts court.

Reuters reported that the U.S. Justice Department filed a petition there arguing that states lack standing to sue contractors such as PHEAA.

The petition came as PHEAA, the Pennsylvania agency that services nearly 25 percent of the nation's student debt, argued that a judge should dismiss the suit Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healy filed against it last summer.

Healy sued the agency that collects student debts under contract to the U.S. Department of Education. Her suit claims PHEAA mismanaged collections on two loan student programs so badly that some who were paying off student loans were losing out on a program that promised loan forgiveness to those in public service work after 10 years of payments.

Healey's lawsuit charges that PHEAA prevented borrowers from making qualifying monthly payments that count toward loan forgiveness and also overcharged students.

A Suffolk County Court in Boston is hearing the case.

Debra Erdley is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 412-320-7996 or derdley@tribweb.com or via Twitter @deberdley_trib

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me