Blog

As we’ve been tracking for over a year now, courts across the country have addressed the significant question of whether the federal laws governing federally owned or guaranteed student loans preempt state laws placing burdens on servicers of those loans. Last week, the Eleventh Circuit became the latest court to weigh in, holding in Lawson-Ross v. High Lakes Higher Ed. Corp. that the Higher Education Act’s (HEA) disclosure requirements do not preempt claims of affirmative misrepresentation by the loan servicer. Although court cases have come down on both sides of this dispute, this circuit-level decision marks a new chapter in the ongoing controversy.

History

In Lawson-Ross, the court’s preemption analysis turned on the precise claims raised by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs (who were borrowers whose student loans were serviced by Great Lakes) had asserted claims for affirmative misrepresentation, rather than an allegation of failure to disclose. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Great Lakes representatives “told them they were eligible for forgiveness of their loans through the [Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program], and only later did they discover they were not eligible-after they had already made payments that could not then be counted toward the PSLF Program.” According to title loans Collierville TN the plaintiffs, Great Lakes had informed them that they were eligible for the PSLF Program and would qualify for loan forgiveness after making 120 payments, when the majority of the loans for each borrower were not federal direct loans, and thus were not eligible.

This new plaintiffs registered a course step criticism, saying says to possess infraction out of fiduciary obligation, carelessness, unjust enrichment, violation out-of an implied contract, and you will solution regarding Florida’s Consumer Collection Methods Act, every premised to the allegation they’d spent many years to make repayments it sensed create qualify for this new PSLF System, only to be told otherwise later.

High Lakes transferred to overlook the case, contending that states have been expressly preempted by Point 1098g off the latest HEA, and this preempts “any revelation criteria of any County laws.” Based on High Lakes, all the says had been preempted as nondisclosure says in line with the so-called inability to reveal factual statements about the fresh PSLF System.

Notably, immediately following Great Lakes recorded the actions so you can dismiss, this new Institution regarding Education granted its see toward , announcing you to “Congress meant point 1098g to preempt any County rules requiring lenders to reveal things or suggestions not needed because of the Federal laws” and this any state statutes towering “the brand new bans to your misrepresentation or omission away from thing recommendations” violated part 1098g’s express preemption supply. Great Lakes maintained the fresh new borrowers’ states was basically only restyled low-disclosure states. The new government region courtroom from inside the Fl conformed. Within the dismissing the outcome the new region judge construed the brand new misrepresentations just like the a “incapacity to provide particular guidance.” The newest plaintiffs appealed.

Eleventh Circuit – No Preemption

On the notice, the latest Eleventh Circuit spotted anything in different ways. Regardless of if part 1098g expressly preempts county regulations that need additional disclosures, new court think it is was not to get understand thus generally hence “state legislation reasons for action developing off affirmative misrepresentations an excellent servicer voluntarily generated you to definitely failed to matter the topic question of expected disclosures enforce no revelation conditions.” The fresh new courtroom finished there can be zero show preemption, dispute preemption, otherwise profession preemption to own like says.

The fresh new courtroom worried about the necessary disclosures to have installment choice lower than the newest HEA’s section 1083(e). They concluded that the brand new affirmative misrepresentation-depending states were some other in the form on disclosure-founded states. The latest plaintiffs weren’t in standard and you may were only requesting advice to your loan forgiveness applications, the fresh courtroom reasoned. With respect to the allegations on the ailment, High Ponds willingly offered the latest consumers not the case facts about the qualification on PSLF System, this provides rise to a non-preempted claim.