Which place’s debt rules apply—and who can help?

S_NH PASS-02 — Bounded worked-example consistency correction

Actual access date: October 24, 2026, Pacific. Runtime: GPT-5.6 Sol Pro, regular Chat, under the authorized quality-first fallback. Disposition: PASS-01 remains immutable. This correction replaces only PASS-01 Examples 7 and 8 and adds the two-source/two-example corrective record below.

Correction determination

PASS-01 Example 7’s individual calculations—$750 total fee, $150 proportional share for a $1,000 debt, and $750 − $650 = $100—were arithmetically correct in isolation. The combined premise was not internally consistent.

Under the example’s single $5,000 enrollment, fixed $750 total fee, and proportional-balance method, all debts other than the identified $1,000 debt total only $4,000. They can therefore support at most:

Plain text

$4,000 ÷ $5,000 × $750 = $600

They cannot support $650 in properly allocated prior fees. Moreover, describing the $1,000 debt as the “first resolved debt” leaves no disclosed earlier qualifying debt from which prior fees could have been earned. Section 310.4(a)(5)(i) requires not just a first payment, but a valid alteration agreement, a payment under that agreement, and—when debts are resolved individually—the selected allocation calculation. eCFR

Exact replacement for PASS-01 Example 7

Example 7 — Later partial settlement, prior proportional fees, and remaining aggregate headroom

Plain text

Single enrollment and fee method

  Total enrolled principal at enrollment:              $5,000
  Contracted total fee for the entire enrolled balance: $750
  New Hampshire aggregate percentage:
      $750 ÷ $5,000 = 15%

  Federal allocation method used for every individually
  resolved debt:
      proportional enrolled-balance method under
      16 C.F.R. §310.4(a)(5)(i)(C)(1)

Earlier resolved debts and prior fees

  Debt A enrolled balance: $2,000

  Assumed performance:
    - Debt A was altered under a valid agreement.
    - The customer made at least one payment under that agreement.
    - The fee was charged only to the extent then permitted by
      the New Hampshire 30-day/monthly-amortization requirements
      and the contract.

  Debt A proportional fee:
      $2,000 ÷ $5,000 × $750 = $300


  Debt B enrolled balance: $1,000

  Assumed performance:
    - Debt B was altered under a valid agreement.
    - The customer made at least one payment under that agreement.
    - The fee was charged only to the extent then permitted by
      the New Hampshire 30-day/monthly-amortization requirements
      and the contract.

  Debt B proportional fee:
      $1,000 ÷ $5,000 × $750 = $150


  Prior properly earned and permitted fees:
      $300 + $150 = $450


Newly resolved debt

  Debt C enrolled balance: $1,000

  Assumed federal performance:
    - Debt C was altered under a valid agreement.
    - The customer made at least one payment under that agreement.

  Debt C proportional allocation:
      $1,000 ÷ $5,000 × $750 = $150


Two numerical constraints

  Remaining New Hampshire aggregate-cap headroom before Debt C:
      $750 − $450 = $300

  Federal amount allocated to Debt C:
      $150

  Maximum under these two numerical constraints:
      lesser of $300 and $150 = $150


Remaining debt

  Debt D unresolved enrolled balance: $1,000

  Remaining proportional share associated with Debt D:
      $1,000 ÷ $5,000 × $750 = $150

  That remaining $150 is not earned on the stated facts because
  Debt D has not been altered and no qualifying payment under an
  agreement for Debt D is stated.


Timing qualification

  The $150 attributable to Debt C is the maximum supported by the
  federal proportional-allocation calculation and the remaining
  New Hampshire aggregate cap.

  It is not automatically the amount presently requestable or
  receivable. The presently chargeable amount remains the lesser of:

    1. $150; and
    2. the amount, if any, then permitted by the contract's
       New Hampshire-compliant monthly-amortization schedule
       after the contract has been effective at least 30 days
       and at the applicable 30-day interval.

  Because the contract term and monthly schedule are not supplied,
  this example does not determine how much of the $150 can be
  collected at a particular interval.

This replacement uses one enrollment, one $750 total contract fee, and one proportional allocation method across all debts. It does not resolve PASS-01’s hold concerning the precise meaning or permissible construction of New Hampshire’s “monthly amortized fee.” RSA 399-D:16 I preserves the 30-day contract-age and 30-day-interval conditions, while paragraph II supplies the 15% aggregate ceiling. New Hampshire Government+1

Exact replacement for PASS-01 Example 8

Example 8 — Federal dedicated-account withdrawal, with earned-fee deduction qualified

Plain text

Customer-owned dedicated-account balance: $2,000

Assumed deductible earned fee: $300

For purposes of this example, the $300 assumption means that:

  - the debt or debts supporting the $300 were altered under
    valid creditor or debt-collector agreements;

  - the customer made at least one payment under each agreement
    supporting the fee;

  - the $300 was calculated under the same selected
    §310.4(a)(5)(i)(C) allocation method used for the enrollment;

  - no part of the $300 exceeds the amount allocable to the
    qualifying resolved debt or debts; and

  - the fee was also permitted to be charged or received under
    applicable RSA 399-D:16 conditions and the contract,
    including the contract-age and monthly-amortization constraints.


Funds remaining after the assumed properly earned fee:

  $2,000 − $300 = $1,700


Result if all §310.4(a)(5)(ii) dedicated-account conditions apply:

  $1,700 must be returned within seven business days after
  the customer's request.


Failure case:

  If some or all of the $300 was not earned in compliance with
  §310.4(a)(5)(i)(A) through (C), it cannot be excluded from the
  account-return amount merely because the customer made one payment.

  The return amount would then exceed $1,700 to the extent the
  $300 deduction was unsupported.

The $1,700 subtraction remains unchanged. The correction is to its premise: the federal dedicated-account provision excludes only funds earned in compliance with all three relevant federal components, including the allocation requirement—not fees supported solely by one payment. This example still does not establish a general New Hampshire cancellation-refund rule. eCFR+1

PASS-01 disposition

S_NH-P2 source register

S_NH-P2 corrective claim rows

Coverage patch

All other PASS-01 sources, claims, examples, FAQ-403 gaps, monthly-formula hold, repayment-cap hold, fair-share hold, commercial money-transmission hold, NMLS/currentness issues, contract questions, case-law questions, and full-state categories remain unchanged. This is not an independent review, full-component acceptance, whole-state acceptance, A066 acceptance, or publication determination.

END S_NH PASS-02.