Note: Please bear in mind that whilst this topic does canvass opinions, it is not a fight club. You may disagree with other posters but we do ask you please to stick to our Talk Guidelines and to be civil. We don't allow personal attacks or troll-hunting. Do please report any. Thanks, MNHQ.

to feel like phoning the student loans company and giving them this person's full details?

(147 Posts)
bubblesinthesky Sat 27-Apr-13 17:01:52

I was at university with someone in the mid 1990s when student loans were just being brought in. He took the full loans but always said he would never pay them back if he could help it. I've stayed in touch with him and recently I mentioned i was happy because I'd finally finished paying my loans back.

He laughed and told me the Student Loans Company had lost track of him years ago and there was no way they'd ever get the money back off him now. He has a really common name so I imagine he would be hard to track down.

AIBU to be considering telling them where he is or should I just leave it? It seems so unfair when he's earning way more than me and has a huge house that he's dodging them in this way while others are struggling to pay them back.

fedupofnamechanging Wed 01-May-13 09:59:54

The people who brought in student loans and scrapped dole during the holidays, were the very people who themselves benefitted from free education. Therefore, I consider the imposition of student loans to be fundamentally wrong and if people can avoid paying it back, then all power to them!

fedupofnamechanging Wed 01-May-13 10:01:14

I also think that hiding behind anonymity is wrong - have the courage of your convictions. If you want to shop him, then that's your prerogative, but have the balls to admit you did it.

FasterStronger Wed 01-May-13 11:32:43

why one earth do you have to admit to someone on the fiddle you shopped them?

fedupofnamechanging Wed 01-May-13 12:00:15

Because if a person too ashamed to admit that they've done something, then perhaps they shouldn't be doing it.

If OP strongly believes that this man is wrong, then she should own that viewpoint and be prepared to act openly. It's underhand to do anything else and makes her no morally 'better' than him.

FasterStronger Wed 01-May-13 12:13:35

why would the OP feel ashamed about shopping someone?

he should feel ashamed.

ryanboy Wed 01-May-13 12:59:56

'why would the OP feel ashamed about shopping someone?'

then why not tell him?

FasterStronger Wed 01-May-13 13:01:08

because it will cause the OP trouble

samandi Thu 02-May-13 08:30:25

I also think that hiding behind anonymity is wrong - have the courage of your convictions. If you want to shop him, then that's your prerogative, but have the balls to admit you did it.

What nonsense. Of course you don't need to "admit it". The OP shouldn't need to put herself in an awkward position when she's not the one in the wrong.

samandi Thu 02-May-13 08:44:56

*I find it very hard to get my head around people who think "not telling" puts them on some kind of higher moral ground Where on earth does that attitude come from? School playgrounds?

Where does love thy neighbour come from? The bible?*

Um, ryanboy ... if we're on Christianity I believe one of the ten commandments is "Thou shalt not steal". Any kind of benefit fraud, like it or not, is stealing.

cathers Thu 02-May-13 08:57:56

I would be ringing SLC with his address!
As stated early, in the 1990s there were no tutition fees. Loans were applied for annually, I think about £3500, per year of the degree to pay for living expenses. Potentially £10K in total.

I recall plenty of students applying for these loans and either pissing them up the wall or investing them for a nice nest egg whilst relying on parental support for living expenses. I think it is time he paid back his loan if he can afford it.

I should be collect via his tax return if he is self employed, but it does seem to rely on you acknowledging there is SLC contribution to make. Likely that HRMC and the SLC just haven't connected his details yet. Do it.

StuntGirl Thu 02-May-13 09:15:02

I would shop him too.

fedupofnamechanging Thu 02-May-13 14:54:14

It's not benefit fraud - it's just not returning the cost of an education that the government (of the time) received for free themselves.

DontmindifIdo Thu 02-May-13 15:00:19

Karmabeliever - if it was a mid90s, this was pre-fees - they still got their education for free, I know several people who got them and then wasted them as their parents were giving them enough to live off. In my experience, the people who where a bit "meh, 5grand or 8grand debt, let's just have fun and worry about it later" weren't those who were using the loans, overdrafts and creditcards to live off, but those who were using them to have fun.

It's not benefit fraud, but it is still stealing. I have no problem with the idea of shopping him.

happyyonisleepyyoni Thu 02-May-13 15:01:58

I'm sure karma will get him in the end, one way or another.

fedupofnamechanging Thu 02-May-13 15:49:46

The fact still remains that the govt who imposed this, had the benefit of grants and dole in the holidays themselves, so shouldn't have been imposing charges for things that they received finance for.

Have you decided what to do? If you do dob him in do you think he'll realise it was you?

samandi Fri 03-May-13 09:25:02

It's not benefit fraud - it's just not returning the cost of an education that the government (of the time) received for free themselves.

Um, he would have received a free education too.

And so what if people were able to claim the dole during holidays at one point? That changed. Deal with it. Compared to the students of today this guy got a very good deal.

fedupofnamechanging Fri 03-May-13 17:22:11

But that reduces everything to the lowest common denominator - just because someone else has it worse, we should be grateful for not having had it quite so bad!

Nelly000 Fri 03-May-13 17:28:44

The fact still remains that the govt who imposed this, had the benefit of grants and dole in the holidays themselves, so shouldn't have been imposing charges for things that they received finance for.

Rubbish.

Times change.

Lots of things are different from a few years ago.

fedupofnamechanging Fri 03-May-13 17:31:46

Different doesn't always mean better.

VerySmallSqueak Fri 03-May-13 17:35:21

I wouldn't tell.

samandi Sat 04-May-13 14:27:22

But that reduces everything to the lowest common denominator - just because someone else has it worse, we should be grateful for not having had it quite so bad!

I think it's unrealistic to expect things not to change. Student loans were introduced to help students afford university. More people go to university than fifty or so years ago - it's unrealistic to expect education to continue to be financed in the same way.

Someone who took out student loans in the mid 90s or so did not typically have it bad. There was a good chance they would have landed a job pretty soon and been able to pay off their student loan quite easily by the time they were thirty or so. I have friends that age and they are all doing very well. They certainly had more opportunity for further education than my parents' generation.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now