erudio student loans

[mrsbug]

Hi, I have an old student loan from 1998 which I have been deferring since then as I have never earned enough to pay it back (there are some advantages to being poor )

I recently had a letter from a company called erudio student loans saying they have bought my student loan from the government. All very reassuring about how the t and cs of my loan won't change, etc.

Now I've had the regular deferral letter from them and it's much more detailed than before. They want my bank details which I'm not really happy to give, and they say my details will be checked with a credit reference agency, which I don't think they used to do - my loan has never shown on my credit file.

Has anyone else had this? Do I have to give them this info?

RE split loans

After seeing posts regarding split loans still being handled by SLC I gave them a ring.
Lady I spoke to at SLC said that as one of my loans is owned by Thesis it will be SLC administering deferment of all loans including those owned by Erudio.

I hope to God this does not change!

@sleepdeprivedmadwoman

Great news.

Daft they didn't do that for everyone and avoid this whole Erudio deferment mess.

@ waitingforgoddot

Yes and No

Rather than view Erudio simply as a debt collection agency, having bought out debts from SLC, they are now also a LENDER - we have all effectively borrowed money from them (in essence) they are our lender.

Lenders can register/share information with Credit Reference Agencies (CRAs) to 'assist' each other with credit/lending decisions

However, it is subject subject to the following:

experian.co.uk/consumer/questions/askjames365.html

This is from the FAQs/Ask James section of Experian's website and says that they are governed by the T&Cs of the lender - (at the time you borrowed)

This is very pertinent indeed given Erudio's links to Experian.

Question to Experian:

*How do I go about revoking permission for you to hold any information on me? Thanks.

Gordon, Leeds
Hi Gordon,

Credit reference agencies (CRAs) don't really work like that I'm afraid. We're licensed to operate a CRA and registered with the Information Commissioner's Office to hold and process personal data. The lenders that use our services require the data sharing we facilitate to run their businesses offering credit. This is why, when you take out a new credit agreement, each lender gives you clear and prominent notification of what personal data will be collected, stored and shared - and, importantly, for what purposes. This forms a part of your agreement with the lender and is not something you can later withdraw. Banks and other lenders have a legitimate business interest to share and store this information with us. But, importantly, this is done with your knowledge and is very much in the interests of you and your lenders; past, present and future. (October 2013) *

Am pleased that SLC will still be handling my deferment but I am still very concerned re credit reports.

I also have a Thesis loan I believe as my loans were 97, 98 and 99 but they all appeared on the letter from Erudio. My deferment is up in May, I will be pleasantly surprised if I hear from SLC instead but I'm not counting my chickens.

Celtic, only my 98 and 99 loans were on letter from Erudio. My 97 one is owned by Thesis.

@emptycoffers

Yes, that is correct.

The original loan agreements gave SLC the right to report defaults to the credit reference agencies. They didn't give them permission to report non defaulted deferred loans.

The original loan agreements also contained a clause saying that they could transfer all their rights and duties under the agreement to another company.

That is what happened when the loans were sold to Erduio.

Erudio have the right to report defaulted accounts to the credit reference agencies. That applies whether they were already defaulted when the loan was sold on, or if they are defaulted some time down the line from now onwards.

What they don't appear to have the right to do is to report non defaulted accounts to the CRAs, as SLC never had that right. Unless of course you sign that waiver on their forms agreeing to it.

mand, that sounds correct under general lawyer too as regards assignments. They simply stepped into the shoes of SLC as it were.

@emptycoffers
Thats all very interesting and just about what BIS told me but not as clearly as you have presented. What does come in to question is that maybe they can do that (for pre 1998 loans)...but dont have to. As SLC didnt register our loans with CRAs, then Erudios promise to treat us fairly at all times, also made implicit in the deal with BIS, is where this issue will be won.
As we have upheld our agreements to maintain contact and defer year on year, we still havent broken any rules, so treating us fairly would at the very least allow us to opt out of that but at the most, Erudio should strike it from their forms. I have been told by Erudio that our deferment forms cover all kinds of deferers, but that that part relates to people who have defaulted in the past. I dont believe that though because i am not sure a defaulter would be allowed back in on the deferment process (maybe they would be, i dont know, but i am certain that they will not account for the majority of deferers).
Executing things to the letter of the law neglects any consideration of treating people fairly. Because we havent had our loans registered before with CRAs suggest to me, that from Erudios perspective, treating us fairly on this issue would mean not registering our loans with CRAs as they do not have to. Remember, deferring is not a common practice and may only relate to student loans, hence other CRAs not encountering such as issue before, as stated above by. As Erudios backers have a clear business relationship with Experian, one that certainly works in their favour to execute Arrow Globals aim to track down and gather information on debters, and against the interests of all those they are pestering, it would certainly be a good show of faith by them to treat deferers fairly by making it clear they will strike this contentious issue off their deferment forms both now and in the future.
I will hopefully get my letter confirming my loan wont be registered with CRAs IF i am deferred this week.

a brief twaater update from the only journalist on the case right now who has published:
simon read ?@simonnread 8h

This story is set to run and run: Former students in uproar over debt collector www.independent.co.uk/money/loans-credit/former-students-in-uproar-over-debt-collector-9240014.html

@simonnread let's hope we start to get concrete answers and written clarification soon

simon read ?@simonnread 9h

@amy_hope so. I'm off work for a couple of days, but plan to be back on the case on Wednesday

@erudioed People who have defaulted but who did not not quite reach the point where the agreement was terminated and full payment demanded, can and have been allowed to re-defer. What happened in those cases was a default was placed on credit files dated for when the default happened, they were allowed to defer again, but had to pay the arrears that had built up while they were not deferred and not paying.

Quite how Erudio would plan to represent that case on credit files until the default and the account drops off is anyone guess, but if they are claiming that the clause only applies to reporting defaulted accounts they are telling porkies there at the very least.

^ was meant to be at @emptycoffers

quote: me "but if they are claiming that the clause only applies to reporting defaulted accounts they are telling porkies there at the very least."

And by that I mean the extra clause they are trying to sneak in on the deferment form.

The one in the original loan agreements only allows the reporting of defaulted accounts.

(must think before I click post. )

Right. Here I go.

I've got copies of my payslips and my P60.

I've written a letter to Erudio requesting deferment and I have provided evidence to support that request. I also explained to them why I am not using their form and that I looked forward to the confirmation of deferment from them.

All ready to be posted off tomorrow (recorded signed for delivery).

I have not cancelled the new DD they have set up on my account. I can deal with that nearer the time they are due to start taking the money.

My goal at the moment is to get deferment then get fighting these barstewards.

Someone should set up a blog page/website for information on the topic, examples of the SLC and any new erudio loan terms and regular updating. The Independent link is interesting, thanks.

If erudio is trying to get people to sign up to new terms those new terms and the old could be posted so people can do a clause by clause comparison. Presumably they have no right to change terms unless both sides agree and the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 shiould mean any terms must be unfair with probably the new CMA (old OFT) able to investigate. The OFT has just been investigating restrictive practices in relation to higher education by the way - whether saying you can only apply to one of Oxford of Cambridge or not is anti competitive so CMA staff may well be very into that sector at present and open to a request by an SLC customer to complain about erudio conduct - if indeed erudio has done anything wrong or misleading. It is also a criminal offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 in any marketing or advertising to mislead. If the erudio terms do change terms sand conditions and if that is not made clear to the person signing trading standards officers and the ASA may look into it and jail sentences are possible.

The Independent journalist may want to look into all this particularly if 300,000 people with these legacy loans are affected.

Sending my form recorded delivery tomorrow too with evidence and covering letter. I've blacked out the bit about giving info to CRA's on p5 of the form, wondering if I need to black out anything on p6 too or just the page I'm signing (page 5) ? Any advice?

Can anyone help me. I moved to another country 15 years. I informed the student loans company at the time. Can erudio do checks on people living in a different country. Can they take money from a foreign back account.

In general terms yes you can enforce money due from people abroad. it's harder. The NHS tries to get money back from foreign visitors who use the NHS and then go back abroad. it's not so easy to recover.

On the qu above I've not seen the form so not sure what you'd blank out but check for any parts which seem to impose new terms and conditions even if just briefly referenced. Is there a copy of the blank form on line anywhere we can check?

Hello,

Just a couple of questions:

1. What exactly constitutes a 'default' according to our T&Cs? (My main concern with this company is that I don't give them any excuse to say I have defaulted on my loans, as this will most certainly be passed on to the CRAs, and negatively affect future credit. Also, it will allow Erudio to move the goalposts).

2. If I fill in their wretched form and give them all my savings info, NI number, etc. that they ask for, and sign page 5 stating that I consent to them passing on the fact that I have a deferred loan to CRAs - what is the worst that will happen? I have 2 loans pre 1998 and one during 1998. I believe SLC already had the authority to register pre 98 loans with CRAs (please correct me if I'm wrong) - so if this is true, what difference will another one make?

As a previous poster said, I am concerned that they are trying to make deferers into defaulters.

If I sign and return this form, am I entering myself into a world of negative credit ratings that could affect our chance of securing a mortgage?

If I don't fill in their form, but send my own letter etc., will they say 'deferment application incomplete, times run out, we're taking your money'.

I really need to send something tomorrow. Thank you in advance for any comments or advice.

Section 4 of www.scoronline.co.uk/files/scor/high_level_prinicples_document_final.pdf

Hello All,

I'm just collecting my evidence together to send off with my form or letter (still not fully decided what to do about that yet!) With regards to the child benefit, it asks for either a:

'benefits award letter for the current period confirming your name, date, type, and amount of benefit received'

What does 'current period' actually mean in Erudio's terms? I only have one award letter that was sent just after my baby was born in 2011. According to the gov.uk site you cannot get alternative written proof of the award. Surely in my case I can argue that 'current period' covers until my child turns 18? Also, on the awards letter it is actually addressed in my husband's name but details my account number (which they can cross reference with the DD details they have of mine). If I send this as evidence of child benefit, would they pull me up on the fact is is not address in my name even though it is sent to my account they have details of?

or

'A copy of your most recent bank statement showing the payment of benefits into your account with the credits clearly identified.'

If I decide to send this as eveidence of child benefit, could I essentially black out everything else on the statement in order to 'highlight' the benefit credit as requested?

Any thoughts/guidance would be so much appreciated!

I do online banking and am sending them a bank statement showing only my child benefit credit. I did this by searching for the credit and then printing off the resulting page if that makes sense.

Also (so sorry about the questions but I'm getting really worked up about this!) in the Proof of Income section, as well as 3 wage slips it asks for a P60. I started in my position last year after having 8 years out of employment, therefore I do not have one (surely they don't expect me to have my P60 from 9 years ago?) I have my letter of offer of current employment detailing my start date, do you think I should send a copy of this by means of explanation?

I know others have said we don't technically need to send a P60 but I just want to try and cover everything so they don't have anything to come back on!

Thanks bobsyouruncle. I can do this also, I suppose it's no different to blacking out the rest of my usual paper statement. I'm just concerned as it will not be an official numbered statement I receive in the post and Erudio could find a way to reject it on this technicality.

Am I just over thinking things now?!!!

I've just noticed the discussion. I was very angry when I got the first letter from Erudio saying they had bought my loans. I could see straight away that they were trying to change / vary the original terms and conditions of the contract. I wrote a letter straight away complaining about that and giving no consent to the varying of the conditions. As far as I can see in my case, they are in breach of contract They've sent me a letter saying any collection activity will be suspended until my complaint is answered. They then had the cheek to send out deferment forms which I have not filled in, as Erudio have again tried to induce me to change the t & c's as part of their deferment process. (I've been deferring for years with SLC).

Essentially, Erudio are trying to intimidate and blackmail people into repaying loans that people are perfectly allowed to defer. Erudio are a bunch of parasites.

Do not consent to any new terms and conditions. By consenting you are contracting. Everything revolves around contracting. By signing anything they've sent you are contracting with them. Don't give any more info than you used to.

erudioed - I refused to accept to being fobbed off with sending a complaint to BIS instead of SLC. SLC did not inform me properly that the loans had been sold. I did not get a letter from the SLC saying that the loans had been sold. I've complained formally to SLC. Anyone, with a loan pre-1998 should also complain to SLC direct as they sale has arguably been to our detriment (eg CRA's for people deferring blackmail).

Important - Has anyone on here had a letter specifically from the Student Loans Company (SLC) on SLC headed paper that their loans had been sold before being told so by Erudio? Please let me know.

There's a can of worms in all this and I'll put up more info as things progress. Glad to see people standing up for their rights. Cheers