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?

in an earlier twaat, Paul Lewis advised:
""Write "this form does not give Erudio permission to pass data to a CRA that it did not have before I signed this form""

however, based on the comment BIS and Erudio gave him above, if you add the "that it did not have before I signed this form" i am again assuming that would allow Erudio to pass on the info for pre-1998 loans.
Anyone read that differently? Because all this seem just as lacking in an answer than before i woke up again today, but this time, one person who could get an answer has not seemingly asked for the evidence in that claim, or why SLC chose not to do it.
I am also still confused, with Lewis getting this answer, whether that contradicts what some of us have been told by Erudio and what we are waiting for letters to state that CRAs will not be given our loan details.

Sound more important than ever now to get copies of your own agreement to see what the original terms really said.

www.nationaldebtline.org/EW/factsheets/Pages/39%20EW%20Credit%20agreements%20-%20getting%20information/Page-04.aspx

£1 fee.

The MSE article title suggest they will report it to CRAs but later on suggests they will keep SLC's policy or not reporting. So which is right, is there a clearer answer someone can see?

This has been posted on the MSE thread as being from a 97 and 95 loan agreement.

Getting journalists involved is great, but seems the can be a bit sloppy in their researches in the eagerness to get a story out.

Sooo... so far all these financial experts wading in has done nothing basically. It all seems a bit half-arsed and we are no clearer than we were before.

That clause 16, if people have it, is just what a lawyer would have drafted to enable the SLC to pass data on. If there were no other restrictions on doing so it would enable SLC to pass data to credit reference companiesl

Another issue is that companies can change terms and conditions. We all hate it but they usually can. Every year your bank will send you their new terms. Their original terms allow them to supply replacement ones without you agreeing. Your water company and all the utilities will do the same.

I am just saying that it is legally possible (i) that SLC or erudio may be able to change existing terms although we would have to read the original terms to check and any legislation on the sell off the loans (the Government could have allowed them to change terms) and (ii) that the original data protection consent given (clause 16 pasted above) if in that form anyway allows them to pass on data to credit reference people.

However I would still advise people not to agree to new terms and to say expressly that they do not agree to the fact their loan is deferred being sent to credit reference agencies.

I was wondering if there is a general consensus about which is the better route to take: send in the forms with bits blacked out or send in a letter and avoid the forms entirely.

I'm inclined to avoid the forms entirely but I don't want to give them room to screw me on some technicality.

@JaneinReading

You can only change the terms of a credit agreement if the original one at inception contained a clause allowing that.

The original SLC agreements I've seen have a clause, but it only allows them, to make changes to the agreement in order to keep up with any changes in the legal regulations. They can't just change the agreements however they like willy nilly.

Trying to follow the MSE thread and now my head hurts!

forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=65221443#post65221443

I've just had a lengthy reply from BIS and they are saying post 98 loans can only be shared with CRAs when in default but pre 98 loans can be shared when deferred they are quoting section 16 of the pre 98 terms, I don't have a copy if this so could someone check this out.

Full response

Thank you for your correspondence of 4 April about the sale of student loans and Erudio. The Minister receives a large amount of correspondence and is unable to respond to each one personally. I have been asked to reply on his behalf.

Terms and conditions:

The terms and conditions of mortgage-style student loans have not changed as a result of the sale of these loans to Erudio Student Loans Ltd (Erudio). Mortgage-style (MS) student loans are regulated loans under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended). The terms and conditions for the deferment of MS loans are prescribed in the Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1998, which state that borrowers will be able to defer their loans if they have not already been asked to repay the loan in full and they can show (i) that their gross income for the relevant month is not more than the deferment level, and (ii) if the lender asks, that their gross average monthly income during the 3 months immediately following the relevant month will not or is unlikely to be more than the deferment level. These terms have not changed as a result of the sale, and borrowers have the same rights and obligations as they had when their loans were managed by the Student Loans Company (SLC).

Erudio requests for information:

Erudio have adopted a different approach to the deferment application process than the SLC previously applied; the information they are asking for is to help them to confirm borrowers’ current gross income and determine their likely gross income over the next three months in order to satisfy the conditions of deferment. This change in approach does not constitute a change to the terms and conditions of the loan as prescribed in the Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1998. The method of the deferment process is not specified in those terms and conditions.

Sharing of data with credit reference agencies:

In the UK, it is generally agreed that reporting relevant and appropriate levels of information about credit agreements and how they are being paid is an important part of the process required to support responsible lending and borrowing. Erudio has discussed the content of the disclosure of information sections of the terms and conditions with the Information Commissioner’s Office. Erudio considers that the reporting of accounts to credit reference agencies is in accordance with the terms and conditions as specified in section 16 (Disclosure of Information) of borrowers’ credit agreements that were issued before 1998. The terms and conditions are different for borrowers with loan agreements from 1998 onwards and in these cases disclosure will only occur if the account is in arrears or default as specified in part (b) of section 12 (Disclosure of information). Borrowers with post-1998 agreements are being offered the option to consent for their up to date accounts to be reported. If consent is withheld, these loans will not be reported to CRAs unless they are in arrears or default.

Inclusion of benefits in income calculations:

The definition of gross income (for the purposes of MS loan deferment) is prescribed in the Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1998. Benefits such as housing benefit, working tax credit and child benefit are included in the calculation of gross income for the purposes of applying for deferment. However, disability related benefits are excluded from income calculations.

Vulnerable borrowers or those in financial difficulty who are having trouble repaying their loans should contact Erudio to discuss their individual situation.

Erudio customer service:

Erudio holds a consumer credit licence regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which ensures high standards of practice in licensees. Erudio must operate in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in borrowers’ credit agreements, and must abide by the regulations governing the loans, guidance from the Office for Fair Trading (OFT) and the Credit Services Association (CSA) and other industry codes of practice, which include particular protections for vulnerable borrowers and those in financial difficulty.

Erudio is working hard to ensure that their Customer Service Teams have the necessary information and guidance to advise customers correctly, and will continue to monitor service levels and make continuous improvements wherever possible.

If borrowers have complaints or believe they are being treated unfairly, they should contact Erudio in the first instance to raise their concerns, which will be investigated through Erudio’s internal complaints procedure.

By post: Erudio Student Loans, PO BOX 580, Rotherham S63 3FR

By phone: 0845 217 1134 (UK); +44 113 318 9010 (overseas)

By email: [email protected]

Website: www.erudiostudentloans.co.uk/

If Erudio cannot resolve the issue satisfactorily or if a borrower has not received a response within 8 weeks, the borrower can refer their complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, an independent service for settling disputes between businesses providing financial services and their customers. They can be contacted as follows:

By post:
The Financial Ombudsman Service, South Quay Plaza, 183 Marsh Wall, London
E14 9SR

By phone:
0800 023 4 567 (normally free from landlines but some mobile networks may charge)
0300 123 9 123 (calls charged at the same rate as 01/02 numbers on mobile phone tariffs)
+44 20 7964 0500 (if calling from outside the UK)

By email: [email protected]

Website: www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk

Note that the Financial Ombudsman only has jurisdiction in respect of Eligible Complaints as defined by the FCA rules. If you are not considered an eligible complainant and remain dissatisfied with Erudio’s final response, you can contact the Credit Services Association:

Credit Services Association, 2 Esh Plaza, Sir Bobby Robson Way, Great Park, Newcastle upon Tyne NE13 9BA

Website: www.csa-uk.com

I trust this response is helpful.

Yours sincerely

Jacqueline Brittain

Repaeta of what I posted earlier.

Allegedly Section 16 of the pre 98 agreements according to the MSE threads

Can you transcribe this Mandakl?

Can't read it as is.

Ta,

Erudio are using the full extent of their powers then, instead of Treating Borrowers Fairly at all Times. Erudio know this level of stress can potentially turn legitimate deferers into payers, so who is there gunning for us now? The people who pay 'their' damn wages!
Maybe tomorrow really will be another day, and some surprises may arrive.

@IchibodT

Hope done without errors.

16 Disclosure of information

The Loan Act prohibits us from discussing information about you to anyone else for the use of soliciting custom for goods and services. The Data Protection Act 1984 also contains protections in relation to the disclosure of automatically processed information about you. Subject to these prohibitions and protections, and any other statutory provisions, we may however, if we judge appropriate, disclose to any person any information concerning or relating to this agreement.

That clause allows sharing of deferred loan information with CRA (which someone says above applies to the older loans).

I agree that if loan terms do not say they can be varied without consent or say the terms can only be altered in certain ways then they are limited to that. So it sounds like for later loans they cannot share the information unless people sign the form.

Somkeone should make a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner that the consent being asked for which has life changing consequences for people wanting to get credit is being sneaked in my erudio for those with the newer of the old loans so that data can be shared and that people will not be making a clear and informed consent. You can make a complaint via the ICO website by email.

I'd rest easier if I knew someone had been successful in getting their loan deferred. This whole thing is turning into a nightmare.

right MSE has amended the 2 ares lacking clarity. It is now titled "Student loans: Graduates deserve truth about what goes on credit files".
And concerning CRA info and derefers, it is written:

Worrying development

This is a change in policy from that of the Student Loans Company, which looked after the accounts before they were sold to Erudio last November (See the Government sells student loans MSE News story). Then, only students who defaulted on payments were reported to credit reference agencies. Nothing changes for that group, but it will for those who defer.

MoneySavingExpert.com has raised concerns about Erudio's move to the Government. We will keep you informed of its response.

So I sent off my letter: requesting continued deferral on my accounts, giving the income information required, and also mentioning my concerns re the form. As mentioned up thread, Erudio staff told me on the phone that a letter would be acceptable in lieu of the form - they said no need to sign or return form if any concerns about it. So I hope that works out. I've included supporting letter from my DH re income. Nothing else, since that was always enough for SLC. I have asked them to inform me if they require CB information, since the note under the Benefits section of their form just says "see instruction booklet", and no instruction booklet was included with my form. I don't remember SLC requiring CB info, so if Erudio do, I'd like to have that in writing before I share it with them.

I sent it Signed For post. Now awaiting developments
Oh and to all for advice - its been really useful to share concerns on this.

Yes, MSE have changed that article massively since they fisrt posted it.

Everyone read www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/loans/2014/04/student-loans-graduates-deserve-truth-about-what-goes-on-credit-files

There was a change in disclosure policy to CRAs according to this Telegraph article in 2008.

However, it seems to state that the change is from total non-disclosure of student loans to disclosure ONLY of those in default.

An SLC spokesperson says the change will affect pre-1998 borrowers.

All of the examples T&Cs I've seen say they could ALWAYS disclose about those in default but were choosing not to (before 2008?):

www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/2785070/Government-toughens-stance-over-non-payment-of-student-loans.html

That's not the same as what BIS and Erudio are claiming however - which is that they have the power to report those simply in deferral NOT in default.

Well found emptycoffers.
We must remember that BIS has a lot to protect in this debate because the due diligence process for who to sell these loans to has, from what i can see, remained secretive. If something was amiss in that, or certain interests (i.e. borrowers) not protected, heads would be rolling. Someone really needs to investigate this if they have the connections.

If they have the legal right to notify the CRAs of our deferred loans then why does the deferment form state that signing it gives our permission for them to so? (or words to that effect?)

So basically they can share pre 98 deferred loans with CRAs and they can ask for whatever info they want, according to BIS?