Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Original poster

erudio student loans

999 replies

mrsbug · 17/03/2014 17:37

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 Smile)

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?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
Dahlen · 25/03/2014 11:14

Thought you all might to see a copy of this, which clearly states that benefits are not included in the calculation of deferment, even though you have to declare them as part of gross income.

Given that the Sale of Student Loans Act 2008 places a requirement on Government to ensure that borrowers whose loans have been sold are not in a worse position than would have been the case had the loans not been sold, I think that should do it.

erudio student loans
mandakl · 25/03/2014 11:38

That says that the student loan company used to disregard them. Not that they HAD to under law.

Don't see anything in the regulations or agreements that say Erudio have to do the same.

I would like it to be true.

mandakl · 25/03/2014 11:49

I did my degree because I wanted to study and work in that area.

If I'd wanted to maximise the amount of money I earned I would have chosen something else.

Dahlen · 25/03/2014 11:52

I think it's the Sale of Student Loans Act bit that's important. If the loans had not been sold to the Erudio people would still be in the position of having benefit income disregarded. Therefore, if Erudio are not following that same procedure the people who have loans with them are in a worse position than would be the case if the loans had not been sold, which is unlawful according to the Act.

That's what I intend to claim, anyway.

emptycoffers · 25/03/2014 12:05

Someone on another forum was adamant that 'all' benefits were excluded from calculation of gross income and although I too wish you were right - I don't think they are.

Dahlen - I've got one of those forms in front of me and where it says 'these benefits will be disregarded in the calculation of your gross income.' - there's an arrow pointing to a list of "disability related benefits" and these are the ones which have always been excluded.

If I was a layman reading that form I wouldn't conclude that all benefits are disregarded - can't imagine Erudio taking the charitable view on that one.

mandakl · 25/03/2014 12:08

It actually says:

"But in amending loan regulations the Secretary of State shall aim to ensure that no borrower whose loan is transferred is in a worse position, as the result of the amendment, than would have been the case had the loan not been transferred."

Not quite the same as being in a worse position solely due to the sale. Instead it is in case where the detriment is due also in part to the SoS changing the loan regulations, which are the legal Statutory Instruments in parliament.

Mutley77 · 25/03/2014 12:09

I always used to declare "my" child benefit income under SLC deferment - although to be fair it was money for my children and in my eyes was paid to both my husband and myself, not sure why it comes under my income.... My understanding of what they asked for was that it needed to be declared (although I didn't realise it wasn't counted). I never added all my savings interest etc though, I hadn't really thought to and it is so minimal it would never have made any difference to me being under the threshold. Under Erudio I have made sure I put everything (even the 8p per month interest we earn on one of our savings accounts - not going to have them catch me out!)

mandakl · 25/03/2014 12:11

Whatever the actual legal position, I think it would be possible via forums, lobbying, papers/media or whatever we can manage to put pressure on Erudio to keep to whatever the SLC used to do. ;)

mandakl · 25/03/2014 12:21

Quote: Dahlen - I've got one of those forms in front of me and where it says 'these benefits will be disregarded in the calculation of your gross income.' - there's an arrow pointing to a list of "disability related benefits" and these are the ones which have always been excluded.

You are right. It specifically points to the list of disability and related benefits there, and says THEY will be regarded. Not the other types of benefits further up the form. Misread that when I looked at mine. Blush

Dahlen · 25/03/2014 12:28

Bollocks.

I'm still a bit confused though. I've never even been close to the threshold before, and now all of a sudden I am over it. So something has clearly changed and it's not my salary or benefit eligibility. How can that be the case?

LittleMissGreen · 25/03/2014 13:21

When DH was supporting me I had to declare that as my income. Now I am supporting DH (and 3DSs). As I get ever closer to the repayment level of salary I am starting to wonder...
Does anybody know, as I have to transfer X amount of pounds to support DH ie give him an income just like he used to give me, can I discount that from my total income? It seems wrong if it is considered an income when given to me, but can't be discounted when in the other direction.

Mutley77 · 25/03/2014 13:31

I really don't get the posts about people saying that their DH "gives them an income" when they are a SAHM. I am not going to put down anything of the sort - I don't earn any money, I have a small amount of state benefits, savings interest, etc which could be considered my income. However I don't get money from DH. He earns it and the loans were nothing to do with him therefore he doens't have to pay them back - in the advisory booklet it states that I don't have to declare the income of my spouse, parents, etc... Are they going to contact me to ask for this? (I have never been a SAHM officially before this year!)

moldingsunbeams · 25/03/2014 14:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

emptycoffers · 25/03/2014 14:34

Mutley - From my own perspective - my partner doesn't 'give me an income' as such - I'm not a kept person or a SAHM. Our individual monies are the same as our joint money.
However, my partner does pay all of the bills from their income. Some bills are set up on DD from my account when I was working so my partner pays money into my account to cover them and any other living expenses I pay for as we go along.
If I were to declare that I have no/zero income on the deferral form and send bank statements to that effect - then Erudio or SLC would have seen credits from my partner into my account - I, and I'm sure many others, have for convenience sake called these payments an 'income' simply to comply with the deferral requirements and keep Erudio's/SLC's noses out of our business as much as possible. Fundamentally, it's a technicality.
I'm not an employee of my partner or a SAHM but there are payments into my account from my partner.

None of the loan companies are interested in the partner's income. This is made crystal clear on all of the paperwork - except where it passes from the partner to the borrower.
If you don't declare it on the form it's nothing to do with anyone - as long as your statements/proof back that up.

LittleMissGreen · 25/03/2014 14:49

:) Mutley, in terms of getting an income from DH it was so I could put down on the form that I had some form of income. I imagine that the SLC wouldn't believe it if I said I lived on nothing at all.

Mutley77 · 25/03/2014 14:57

I see what you are saying but wondered if anyone has effectively declared a zero income and then been questioned.

I have a single account but it is empty with no credits or debits !!! Any other accounts are joint and the incomes are DH's salary, minimal benefits, savings interests etc - therefore I don't have any personal income. Our joint expenditure is paid from these accounts. I have not declared any income from DH and wonder whether that will be queried!! Any advice?

mandakl · 25/03/2014 15:27

What other people I know have done with the SLC is work out what basic level of benefits you would be entitled to if your OH wasn't able to support you. Then put that down as the level of support they are giving you. Then they include a letter stating that they are supporting you on that basic level and you have no income.

EmmaBemma · 25/03/2014 15:48

I'm confused - one of my loans (I have four) has been transferred to Erudio but I got a deferment form from SLC as usual, which lists all four loans on the front of the form including the one that was sold. I'm not sure whether this means SLC will still be administering the deferment process for all four, or whether to expect one of these from Erudio too.

Original poster
mrsbug · 25/03/2014 15:54

Mutley in the past i have been travelling abroad and i just wrote to the slc informing them that my income was zero and i was living off my savings. They never queried this.

OP posts:
BlessThisMess · 25/03/2014 15:58

Thanks so much for all the useful info on this thread. I expect I will be getting my deferral forms through shortly so will use the advice on here. I hope it will be the last time though as I will be 50 in Aug so they should get written off then!

mahtin · 25/03/2014 18:37

Wow, 2 weeks ago i was franticly trawling the net for reassurance re erudio. Ive read a lot of sense here, and I feel better having found I've prob done the right thing in conforming as much as is practical, in filling out my next deferral form. They recieved it today i see from the post offices track and trace. Good advice earlier to send it recorded signed for.
I wish I'd had the idea of an accompanying note denying consent for changes in t and c's - good one that. Irony for me is I'm eligible for my loans to be wiped in july when i reach 60.
Picture a specific office just for the forms returned to erudio with the orange recorded sticker on. Well, they started it!!!

Basicaly i dont trust them, and I dont trust the fact they've extended my current deferral period an extra month. Could that be a lure to have me over extend?? Nobody has mentioned they have been awarded an extra month.......anybody??

Wibblypiglikesbananas · 25/03/2014 18:43

Ooh, just came over here from another thread that was linked. I've deferred for the past couple of years, so will be interested to see what happens now. I'm in the US so will watch for a letter in the next few days. I'm also interested in how they will like my American tax return, if I have to send that in. Saying that, they seem dab hands at unintelligible correspondence and calculations, so maybe they'll be more than happy to receive it. Hmm...

emptycoffers · 25/03/2014 19:23

mahtin - I suspect the extra month was a condition of the sale/purchase of the loan book - mainly to protect borrowers whose annual deferment would usually expire at beginning of April.
On the basis that if the data migration from SLC went pear-shaped and the postal system went belly-up, borrowers would have to have been allowed extra time to submit their deferral applications.
Otherwise Erudio would have been accused of delaying deliberately in order to force people into default.
They're buggers, but we can't get them on that one... yet!

It's great to see so many people on this thread - definitely a sense that we can work together on this!

leica · 26/03/2014 07:30

I totally agree that we need to stick together on this - I would love to have Martin 'Money Saving Expert' Lewis on our side so I think I'll tweet him and see if if I can get his attention. Be amazing if everyone could do the same.

I'm a member of UNISON and as such, can get 30 minutes' free legal advice and have an appt to do just that next week. It's not that I don't believe anyone who's saying Erudio can't ask this, that or the other, but I'd feel a million times more confident knowing that I've asked someone who's an expert in the law.

Also: has anyone actually been given a date by which to defer? SLC always used to, but this lot hasn't. I'd hope that as long as I get my forms/letter/whatever back by a week or so before I'm due to start repaying, then I'd be okay?

I spotted a great typo on the final page of the form: '...if and when you recommend payments.' Erm, do you mean 'recommence'?

And finally (verbal runs this morning Wink ) does anyone know if, for example, my deferral form was late, would that be it for the next 12 months and I'd have to start repaying, or could I defer at any time?

mandakl · 26/03/2014 08:03

The 1997 regulations and the loan agreements allow the deferment date to be backdated by up to 3 months before the date they finally accept your deferment, but no more.

So if your deferment has already run out then you can still defer completely and technically have it backdated to the date your old one ran out as long as it's accepted within 3 months of the old period running out.

You can still defer after that 3 months, but the backdated date would then leave you with a period in which legally you were not deferred and are liable for payments.

If your deferment isn't done until 4 months after the old one ran out, you will be liable for one month's payments.

If your deferment isn't done until 6 months after the old one ran out, you will be liable for 3 months payments.

etc