DH has asked me to start a thread in AIBU. He will go with the majority.

[Showy]

I am a SAHM. I have a handful of useless degrees. I am not paying back my student loan atm on account of my 'homemaker' status (SLC's term, not mine). They have all my relevant details. They know I have no income, am a 'homemaker' and they have my NI number, the fact I have two young children etc on record.

The Student Loan Company have written to tell me that DH must provide proof of the 'value of his support' in the form of 3 months of bank statements. They are very clear in their letter and on the phone that not providing his bank statements will be taken as me trying to get out of repaying my loan and they will 'take steps'.

DH wants to know if he IBU to...

Think his bank statements are none of their business.
Think his bank statements prove absolutely bog all in terms of my student loan.
Send a snippy letter accompanying his bank statements.
Object to the notion that he 'supports' me rather than being married to me in an equal partnership.

He is quite cross. I am not a bit cross and want to just send the statements (which he is right, prove nothing at all in terms of whether I have money I am hiding from them). I've told him he should not be sending snippy letters to people who are just doing their jobs. He is poised and about to lick his stamp.

So...

IHBU?

My DH sent a letter saying he supported me- it was one line long. They then asked for my bank statements- I took a black marker pen and redacted everything except the two payments I had coming into my account. They don't need to know how much I spent at Tescos or anything else- none of their business. I don't know why they have asked for his statements though- it is his alone or are they asking to see joint account info? I don't think he IBU.

He is NBU -I don't understand how they can claim they need to see 'the value of his support' What difference does it make, given the terms of the loan, whether you scrape by on very little earned by him, or have lots of 'support' sloshing around, still earned by him?

Proof of his your husband supports you.. Well i would have some fun... Send them a large package filled with shopping receipts with attached photos of husband with shopping trolly/husband at till paying /husband with shopping bags/husband handing over shopping to you and then a nice photo of you eating dinner.. I would do this for every aspect of life.. Clothes shopping/carrier bags you modeling new t-shirts . Picture of husband handing you £20, lengthy bullet point explanations detailing photos as exhibit A1 ect. I would also make the make the photos as sickeningly 1950's poster housewife as i could. I would send them so much gumf they would be drowning in it

the courts used to be a bit of a married woman driving a Merc who acc to her means form earned nothing, and could presume a spousal income that supported her

THey arent allowed to do that anymore

Yep, with Vivienne here, it's the nature of borrowing money, and the nature of being married to someone that owes it.

Even if non-payers are somehow taken into account in the structuring, it's raising the cost for the program in the future. I get the companies administering these can be crap, I get what you're saying about the smallprint, but ultimately if you don't want the hassle, either don't borrow the money in the first place, or pay it back.

They aren't allowed to do so for good reason. The implication being that she is providing a service and he is making payment in kind.

Revolting.

Write back and tell them that under FOI they do not get to see the statements

or that they just share money and the woman is a sahm

Viv That is not true. My repayments over the summer after graduation included interest income earned on money I inherited as well as rental income and capital gains made from flipping homes.

In my case the odious cretins at SLC have gone so far to say 'Why are you challenging the repayment of your loan? You have enough money to pay this countless times over.' The fact I repaid once already doesn't seem to register with them. I was also insulted that they had looked up my address to see what the property is worth.

The loan agreement stipulates repayment is based on the borrowers income. It doesn't say borrowers OH, partner, parents, siblings or anyone else. If the borrower (OP in this case) is earning and paying the money into their OH's account they are lying and should be punished per the law. If SLC has reason to suspect that OP is working and hiding money in their OH's account, this could be easily investigated through an inquiry with inland revenue and should not involve any input from the OP's OH.

Instead the SLC is being lazy. Indirectly what they are saying is 'We don't believe you.' That is insulting.

I did something similar motherofmonster, in that SLC suddenly decided that the fact I was claiming self employed WTC and CTC and Housing Benefit with a tax return declaring a profit of zero from my recently started business wasn't sufficient "proof of support". They said they wanted to see incomings and outgoings from my business- why? why???

So I shoved every single receipt and invoice from that year's business into an envelope higgledy piggledy and sent it off to them, along with a stiff letter to their complaints department. That shut them up .

Ok please can someone explain wtf anybody needs to prove to a loan company how they support themselves? The person declares they are not earning, therefore not eligible to pay. If SLC wish to dispute this, they will have to investigate and prove otherwise. Why would they care if the person has no income to support themselves and living in the gutter? A third person vouching their support does not prove anything about the debtor's income!

That and the sexist shite.

Wrong wrong wrong.

But, Want, there is an argument that a spouse's income is shared, otherwise, how is OP eating, paying her half of the rent / mortgage etc? She's not entitled to share her spouse's income? You can't have it both ways.

Why is it sexist?

Rtft Dognado.

Absolutely, sofatastic.

FWIW, Housing Benefit also do this: "We need to know how you're supporting yourself". "Well, chiefly, I'm supporting myself by CLAIMING FUCKING HOUSING BENEFIT!"

She isn't entitled to share half his income, no. The only legal entitlement to any money from a spouse comes when you divorce them or they die intestate.

Evidently I fucking have Moving, and I disagree.

In their very faint defense, SLC are wankers to both genders. When I was the breadwinner in our family I had the same demand from them. In our case I just wrote a letter saying "I confirm I am providing financial support to Mr Owlborn. Yours sincerely Owlborn" and then left it.

I sent off the letter saying DH supported me back in January, I haven't heard anything back from them. Would they have asked for bank statements by now if they were going to?

Just to repeat from my op, the SLC didn't write to DH, they wrote to tell me to tell DH to send his bank statements. The actual request was that I should fill in the little bits I was capable of coming up with given the limitations of my sex such as confirmation of my name if I can remember it and a wild stab at my DOB and then I should pass the forms along to my superior DH so that he could fill in the tricky bits along with a copy of his last 3 bank statements.

Do you think I could send the tatty teddy notepaper and a fuckton of confetti?

Quite irrelevant but you stamps are self-adhesive now, aren't they?

Yeah but "about to lick his stamp" is funny and I am easily amused.

Bit touchy there Dognado.

Regardless of your views on the ethics of repayment or sharing income, this kind of tactic by SLC is an attempt to try and alter the terms and conditions of the original loan which is illegal.

You could accidentally forget to put a stamp on at all...