�鶹��ý

The �鶹��ý Trade Commission has stopped the operators of a scheme that it says tricked financially strapped consumers seeking student loan relief into paying hundreds of dollars in junk fees. The operators often targeted Spanish-speaking consumers in Puerto Rico, pretended to be affiliated with the Department of Education and its loan servicers, and made false promises of low, permanently fixed monthly payments and loan forgiveness.

A federal court temporarily halted the scheme and froze its assets at the request of the FTC, which seeks to end the unlawful practices and secure redress for the thousands of consumers who have been harmed.

“By pretending to be affiliated with the Department of Education and misrepresenting features of its free income-driven loan repayment programs, these scammers bilked millions from the consumers these programs were designed to help,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “We are pleased that the court preliminarily shut down this predatory operation and froze its assets, and we will continue our efforts to crack down on junk fees, unwanted calls, and exploitation of consumers struggling with student loan debt.”

According to the FTC’s complaint, since at least April 2019, Florida-based Start Connecting LLC and Colombia-based Start Connecting SAS (collectively doing business as USA Student Debt Relief (USASDR) and their owners and operators Douglas Goodman, Doris Gallon-Goodman, and Juan Rojas have enticed consumers by falsely suggesting an affiliation with the government or its student loan servicers. USASDR also falsely promised to enroll consumers in programs that guarantee permanent low, fixed monthly payments—as low as $9 per month—followed by generous lump-sum loan forgiveness of the remaining balance. In exchange for enrollment, the operators have charged consumers illegal advance fees of several hundred dollars followed by monthly fees of as much as $29. Although USASDR claimed it would apply consumers’ monthly payments to their loan balances, in reality USASDR’s operators pocketed consumers’ hard-earned money and offshored much of the funds to Colombia.

The complaint also notes that USASDR falsely marketed its services with fake testimonials and reviews on its website and social media pages, as well as on third-party consumer review platforms like those hosted by the Better Business Bureau and Trustpilot. For example, USASDR posted testimonials to its Instagram and Facebook pages that falsely appeared to recount real consumers’ positive experiences with the company. One such testimonial posted on August 19, 2022 purported to recount the experience of “Ana Rojas” and falsely claimed that USASDR had reduced her loan payments from $1,300 per month for 28 years to only $417 per month for eight 8 years.

Image

In reality, according to the complaint, this review and others like it are fabricated. Fake testimonials like the one from Ana Rojas feature stock photos available for download online and describe permanently-fixed-monthly-payment scenarios that cannot be obtained under any income-driven repayment plan.

In addition, the complaint alleges that USASDR telemarketers based in Colombia placed unwanted telemarketing calls to consumers throughout the United States, including consumers on the Do Not Call Registry, and disproportionately targeted consumers in Puerto Rico. Of the more than 750,000 outbound calls that USASDR telemarketers made to consumers between April 2019 and February 2024, approximately 220,000—nearly 30 percent—went to consumers with a Puerto Rico area code, many of whom only spoke Spanish. The complaint further notes that USASDR unfairly provides Spanish-speaking consumers with fine-print contracts written in English, even though the sales pitch and email communications to those consumers are generally in Spanish and targeted consumers who do not speak or read English fluently, if at all.

The FTC thanks the U.S. Department of Education, the Better Business Bureau of West Florida, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, and the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office for their assistance with this matter. 

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint was 5-0. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The court entered a temporary restraining order on July 11, 2024.

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the named defendants are violating or are about to violate the law and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. Stipulated final orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

The lead staff attorneys on this matter were Nathan Nash, D’Laney Gielow, and Karen Dodge of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.