FTC Bans Superior Servicing Operator Over Student Loan Forgiveness Scam

FTC Bans Superior Servicing Operator From Debt Relief Over Student Loan Forgiveness Scam

The Federal Trade Commission on July 21, 2026 announced a proposed order permanently banning Dennise Merdjanian, an operator of Nevada-based Superior Servicing LLC, from the debt relief and telemarketing industries, after alleging her student loan forgiveness scam took more than $45.9 million from borrowers.

Information last verified on July 23, 2026. This is a developing story; we update it as the record changes.

Jurisdiction scope: This is a federal FTC enforcement action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. This article provides general consumer-protection information about that matter and about federal law. It is not individualized legal advice.

What Happened

The FTC announced on July 21, 2026 that it had filed a proposed stipulated order to resolve its charges against Dennise Merdjanian, whom the agency identified as an operator of the student loan debt relief scheme run through Superior Servicing LLC. The proposed order permanently bans Merdjanian from providing debt relief services and from telemarketing, according to the FTC's press release.

The order also imposes a monetary judgment of more than $45.9 million. That judgment is partially suspended because of Merdjanian's inability to pay. The FTC stated that if Merdjanian is found to have materially misrepresented her finances, the full amount becomes immediately due. The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order was 2 to 0, and the FTC filed the proposed order in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.

The case is FTC v. Superior Servicing, LLC, No. 2:24-cv-02163-GMN-MDC. The FTC first sued Superior Servicing and Merdjanian in November 2024, filing its complaint on November 18, 2024. The court entered a temporary restraining order and froze assets on November 22, 2024, and entered a preliminary injunction against corporate defendant Superior Servicing on December 6, 2024.

According to the FTC's complaint, since at least January 2023 the Nevada-based operation made telemarketing calls and sent personalized mailers to borrowers, falsely claiming that consumers who enrolled could obtain loan consolidation, reduced interest rates, lower monthly payments, or loan forgiveness. The FTC alleged the operators pretended to be affiliated with the U.S. Department of Education and collected illegal advance fees of up to $899 as an initial payment, followed by monthly payments they falsely represented were going toward the consumers' student loan debt.

The FTC expanded the case in 2025. An amended complaint added corporate defendants Sunrise Solutions USA LLC, Alumni Advantage LLC, Student Processing Center Group LLC, SPCTWO LLC, and Accredit LLC, along with individual operators Eric Caldwell and David Hernandez. In September 2025, the court entered orders banning Caldwell and Hernandez from the debt relief industry. In June 2026, a federal judge entered a default order against the corporate defendants. The July 2026 proposed order against Merdjanian addresses the remaining individual operator.

What the Law Actually Says

The FTC brought this case under core federal consumer-protection authority. Section 5 of the FTC Act, codified at 15 U.S.C. 45, prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce. Misrepresenting a government affiliation and promising loan forgiveness that never materializes falls squarely within that prohibition.

The Telemarketing Sales Rule, at 16 CFR Part 310, governs how debt relief services may be sold by phone. Its debt relief provisions bar a seller or telemarketer from requesting or receiving any fee for debt relief services before it has actually renegotiated, settled, reduced, or otherwise altered the terms of at least one of the consumer's debts. The advance fees the FTC described, collected before any relief was delivered, are the practice that rule is designed to stop.

The FTC also invoked its Government and Business Impersonation Rule, at 16 CFR Part 461, which took effect in 2024 and prohibits impersonating a government agency. The agency alleged the operation falsely posed as affiliated with the U.S. Department of Education.

One point of standing federal law matters for every borrower. The U.S. Department of Education and its federal student aid programs do not charge advance fees for federal loan consolidation or for forgiveness programs. Those services are available for free through the government at StudentAid.gov. Any company that charges up front to enroll a borrower in a free federal program is a warning sign, not a shortcut. Readers weighing broader options for overwhelming debt can review general background on personal bankruptcy, which follows its own federal process.

Analysis: Why This Matters

The following is analysis from the Recording Law Editorial Team.

This action fits a sustained pattern of FTC enforcement against operations that charge consumers for services that are either free or never delivered. The agency has pursued similar theories against junk fees, as in its Hopper junk fees settlement, and against deceptive marketing more broadly, as in its order against TruHeight over fake reviews. Student loan relief scams share a common structure: a real financial burden, a confusing federal program, and an advance fee dressed up as help.

The partial suspension of the $45.9 million judgment is standard FTC practice, not leniency. When a defendant cannot pay the full amount, the agency commonly suspends part of a judgment while preserving the right to collect the whole sum if the defendant is later found to have hidden assets or lied about finances. The permanent industry ban, rather than the dollar figure, is often the more durable remedy, because it removes the operator from the market regardless of what can be recovered.

The case also unfolded under the FTC's current governance, and the composition and authority of the Commission itself remain a live legal question, as reflected in the Supreme Court dispute over FTC removal power. The 2 to 0 Commission vote on this stipulated order is a reminder that the agency continues to act with fewer sitting commissioners than its full complement.

How to Spot a Student-Loan Relief Scam

The allegations in this case track red flags that federal regulators have flagged for years. As general consumer information, the following patterns commonly signal a student loan relief scam:

Watch for anyone who charges a fee before providing any service. Federal law prohibits telemarketed debt relief companies from collecting advance fees, and the Department of Education never charges to enroll you in a federal program.

Be skeptical of claims of a special government affiliation. Scammers often imply they work with or for the Department of Education, sometimes using official-sounding names or logos.

Distrust promises of guaranteed or fast total forgiveness. Federal forgiveness programs have specific eligibility rules and timelines, and no private company can guarantee an outcome.

Never share your Federal Student Aid account login, or FSA ID, with a third party. Legitimate assistance does not require you to hand over your government credentials.

Slow down when pressured to act immediately. Urgency and limited-time enrollment claims are tactics, not deadlines set by the government.

This is general legal information, not legal advice. It summarizes a federal FTC enforcement action, FTC v. Superior Servicing, LLC, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, as verified on July 23, 2026. It does not address your individual situation and does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your own circumstances, consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

Last updated: 2026-07-23. This is a developing story; details verified as of 2026-07-23.