34 C.F.R. § 674.41

Due diligence—general requirements

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. Each institution shall exercise due diligence in collecting loans by complying with the provisions in this subpart. In exercising this responsibility, each institution shall, in addition to complying with the specific provisions of this subpart—

(1) Keep the borrower informed, on a timely basis, of all changes in the program that affect his or her rights or responsibilities; and

(2) Respond promptly to all inquiries from the borrower.

(3) Provide the borrower with information on the availability of the Student Loan Ombudsman's office if the borrower disputes the terms of the loan in writing and the institution does not resolve the dispute.

(b) Coordination of information. An institution shall ensure that information available in its offices (including the admissions, business, alumni, placement, financial aid and registrar's offices) is provided to those offices responsible for billing and collecting loans, in a timely manner, as needed to determine—

(1) The enrollment status of the borrower;

(2) The expected graduation or termination date of the borrower;

(3) The date the borrower withdraws, is expelled or ceases enrollment on at least a half-time basis; and

(4) The current name, address, telephone number and Social Security number of the borrower.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1845-0023) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 424, 1087cc) [52 FR 45555, Nov. 30, 1987, as amended at 59 FR 61411, Nov. 30, 1994; 64 FR 58312, Oct. 28, 1999]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1999–1999 · leading case: Vanderbilt Univ. v. Pamela Henderson (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Vanderbilt Univ. v. Pamela Henderson (Tenn. Ct. App. 1999). “§ 1080 (a) (West 2000); 34 C.F.R. § 674.41 (a) (2000) and provide that colleges and universities that do not meet these standards may be removed from the program.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.