Erudio Student Loans Continued

[halfpricedebt]

Started a new thread following mrsbug's request.

I got an email from Erudio today telling me that an issue I raised with them on 27 March that was then completely ignored even though they asked for confirmation of my details to process the initial email. I gave them the details they requested and seven days later I still hadn't heard anything. So I wrote them a rather threatening complaint telling them if they didn't respond within 7 days I would report them to the relevant financial services. That was on 3 April and today they've told me that my complaint has been forwarded to their Customer Resolutions Team.

I wonder what they do?

I got my deferment letter today. Only 3 weeks after my deferment was supposed to end.. Bunch of incompetents.

I didnt provide my P60 and told them it was impossible because it didn't yet exist. They have set up a direct debit for £0.00. Talking to my bank it will be cancelled by them after 6 months if nothing is taken.

wow, everyone will want to read this, it seems our first changes are in sight, including a newly designed deferral form in the works, with input from us before deciding on the final version. And more. No budging on the CRA issue though, they are still maintaining that trading our info is the right thing to do.:
www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/loans/2014/05/erudio-student-loans-500-people-had-mistakenly-taken-from-accounts

anyway, lets see what happens if the dont process our deferment forms before the first DD is due. That will be my barometer if they really have decided to approach us in a different way or if this is just a bullshit firefighting exercise by Arrow. I want to believe, but some of the stories i have read in the last few days suggest not much has changed thus far.

I read the article on MSE earlier and whilst I too want to beleive these changes will be made until they actually happen I won't count my chickens.

Have to say since Martin Lewis got on the case a lot seems to have happened in our favour and for that I'm thankful. He's like a dog with a bone!

I'm also thankful for the hours of research people on here have done and for the advice and input they have given, it really has been a great help.

Here's hoping this mess does get sorted soon.

So they say they cant get info from a CRA without putting data in. Newsflash Erudio.. You dont need to get any data from a CRA!

A little bird told me Simon Read has interviewed Zach Lewy and an article is imminent. I make an uninformed guess based on nothing that this is all in response to trying to render his piece out of date. We will see. It is an odd time to reveal such info, a friday night before this weekends glut of stories potentially from the Guardian and The Independent

They want all our financial history data from CRAs. They want the deferral form info we have provided to slip us up and give Capita the power to prove we are lying etc etc. Thus turning us into defaulters. To me, this 'trading' of our personal info is a disgrace and the crux of a very serious issue.

@Joymaker

My loans are all pre 1998.

Thanks tiger and getting your deferment sorted also for you ZZZZ

Just to clarify a direct debit can be set up by erudio if they have your bank account details when you originally signed the loan agreement or set it up when sending the new application back, however you can phone your bank and cancel it, however erudio can recall for the amount to reclaim the money once again after they don’t get it. Money shouldn't be collected from your account after you have cancelled and under the Scheme rules, an organisation would have to obtain your authority to reinstate a cancelled Instruction. However they must inform you 10 days before the money comes out how much they are taking or its breach of direct debit guarantee, you can claim the money back through your banks indemnity process as compensation for your loss.

Failure to not have a direct debit set up on your loan accounts is not a breach of the loan agreement, its just a safety clause so they dont need to chase you for arrears until you defer if your late in deferring, as you could for instance you could send a cheque but that’s has to be 10 days before the payment is due to allow it to clear or pay by card over the phone, set standing order up for the money to eurido.
If your account falls into arrears, Their arrears department will just phone you or contact you by letter for regarding arrears this while your deferral takes place as you have breached the terms and conditions of the loan, but legally within the loan agreement you are required when not deferred to maintain payments, that’s why they insist on direct debit being on the account. However the system backdates it 3 months if you miss payments, hence why it dose not go on your credit report until 4 months as you would still owe them money for the remaining 1 month.

The only way you cannot be accepted for deferral is if you are not eligible.
Do not contact them by email as they dont respond for 2 weeks, then it takes them 21 days to look at your claim. if phoning phone at 9 o’clock and you will get right through otherwise it will cost you fortune. They have a backlog off 3 weeks or so after having spoke to them on the phone.
My deferral is now in place if sending 3 months payslips or 6 fortnightly ones, you must also send p60 most recent one will do or they will deem it incomplete as they did with mine, send everything recorded delivery.

i was slightly wrong about the Independent article today, but here it is. I guess something is better than nothing. They are blaming incompetence theory again for the problems, or migration problems:
www.independent.co.uk/money/loans-credit/debt-firm-wrongly-snatched-cash-from-graduates-9348632.html

I would add though that as Erudio is Honours Student Loans, just another shell company set up The Wilmington Trust for Arrow, and contracting the same Capita staff, that since HSL was established in 1999, can a software system that snatches DD payments illegally really be accepted as a migration problem by Erudio? This is the one thing they would have to assure is ok in their software/system.

just to add even if you for say had defaulted on your loan for say 5 months for instance as you had changed address and never recieved the forms due to this and had no d/d set up causing the arrears you would have breached the loan agreement. This would show on your credit report.

You would just ring them and be passed over to their arrears department, who would try and would allways ask for full payment on what you owed at that time, You would set up payment arrangement for say 3 months & give them your new address and get the deferral forms sent out usually it would take 28 to redefer, your deferral would backdate 3 months. so payment plan you would have in place would be for additional 3 months you owe. This means even if you breached the loan agreement as described above you can still defer.

Any income you declare on the forms, you must provide evidence and sometimes 3 months of bank statements showing payments going into the account if you dont have the forms and you can blank out whatever you dont want them to see as in balances and that. P60 is a new thing that they have added most recent one is fine. Wither your a home owner or not or have savings is irrellevant and they are just trying to gain more details about you. Must also state the hardest way to defer is if you are self employed as you must send them a tax return which isnt easy to obtain if done online, u can however get letter from your accountant stating your accounts for that year showing exactly what your tax returns states.

Another success story here!

Got my confirmation of deferral letter through yesterday. I have to confess though, I filled in the whole form and sent everything they asked for, simply because, for me, the MOST important thing was getting the deferral processed. I've got a long-term sick partner, I suffer with depression and money is tight - the last thing I needed was more sleepless nights than I was already having, so I just took the path of least resistance. I'm not happy about the information being passed to CRAs, but it is what it is.

Still, I think we can be proud of ourselves that our Tweeting, this thread and the one on MSE have at least brought this unholy mess into the public eye and I am very pleased to see that changes are afoot.

I'd like to thank everyone on this thread for their posts - I've found them utterly invaluable through an incredibly stressful 2 months since receiving the forms and having confirmation through.

Congrats Leica, and i hope sleep comes much easier now. I know exactly how you feel. Just dont forget to dip your foot in the forums now and again just in case something happens because it will be a yearly thing, and who knows what changes will be afoot, they may not all be positive for the coming years and we might need to be a collective force again, as well as remaining one still until things actually do change.

Oh, I'm sticking around. I like it here (even though I don't have any children - shhh!)

Haha! I bet Erudio and Zach Lewy are cursing mumsnet and MSE/Martin Lewis.

Nice job so far. Lets keep the pressure up.

Thanks willdef. Very useful information.

I concur mandakl, we have managed to be heard thus far.
I do wonder how trading our info provided previously to the government actually being openly traded with CRAs supports our claims. I would have thought they could buy access by paying, but using our info as a trade to benefit them financially, at the expense of us, is rather abhorrent. After all, all the defaulters in the loans they have purchased would already have their info with CRAs, so the only info they would have to 'trade' is ours.
Anyone else think that makes sense to continue on this issue?

No matter what anyone says the decision to pass info on deferral over to CRAs is a bullying tactic plain and simple. Whatever Erudio and Experian say this could adversely affect your credit rating and this is exactly the thought Erudio wanted to sow in people's minds.

As I've said previously for a lot of people with smaller loans this information on your file will not make much difference.

I think the only way to combat this is to chase the point that the government said people would be no worse off under Erudio than they were under SLC. It's not much to go on but but for pre 98 loans it is all we've got.

I think the next big thing to watch out for is what will happen after this deferral window for those granted deferral, we need to keep an eye on our credit files and see if/how this info is registered. I have loans pre and post 98 and if any of the post 98 are registered with CRAs then Erudio will be in breach of those loan agreements and I'll make sure something is done about it.

Question, if the money is taken out and you request it back under DD guarantee it takes a day and not them do DD it back from them?

I don't understand why it would take them three weeks to return someone's money! It should be three days not weeks!!!

You should contact your bank for the refund under the DD guarantee and it should be immediate. You should then take the matter up with Erudio.

Becca it would and should be 3 days if its a bacs payment. but really as they as they have breached the d/d terms if paperwork was recieved by them in time, proof by recorded delivery. they should be making a chaps payment as its their fault meaning on the same day, but no chance of that.

After taking a bit of time to digest the new info, I have a few thoughts on the recent article on MSE about Arrow's concessions. Firstly, if they are going to redesign the deferment forms and highlight what is mandatory and what is not, does it make any difference whatsoever. They have already gotten than info from many of us, so would not need it restating anyway...they already have that information. However, will they delete that information that they blackmailed us into providing or re-ask us if we would mind them using it? Either way, it has been attained deceitfully, so they should either not use it and delete it out of respect, or ask us to submit it if we wish to.

Secondly, and although its good they have come clean(er) about how many got their bank accounts raided (and from pressure from BIS as i understand it reading between the lines), why havent they compensated everyone for the inconvenience if they are truly sorry, as a token gesture. After all, with so much experience of such things via Honours Student Loans for many years, you would have thought software blocking funds being taken would be the one fail safe they would have prioritised. Then, after knowing so many were being taken, why couldnt they stop it sooner. After all Zack Lewy stated on BBC radio that they look at the statistics every night, so how can they not spot bank deposits very easily in their accounts. Surely the statistic for how much money they have taken on a given day is the bottom line? One can only draw 1 or 3 answers:
A) It was just a starter company's error
B) They arent fit for purpose
C) They lied and have their own reasons for doing so

Thirdly, concerning poor customer service. I think it is clear that many of us feel deliberately confused and told things that just arent true. The kinds of things debt collectors are reknown for. However, here is their rather contemptful and lay the blame elsewhere answer in the MSE article:
Erudio outsources the servicing of its loans to Capita. It says poor customer service from its helpline is down to the fact it sent out a lot of letters about the sale, deferments, and direct debits in a short period of time, leading to a lot of people getting in touch.
It adds this was exacerbated by students who hadn't kept their addresses up to date, so had not received any letters and were confused about what was happening.

So, none of the blame is on a lack of trained staff or weak structure from their end. The conflicting answers i was given would have been given even if they werent busy. The staff didnt know what hit them and they were chronically undertrained by Capita/Arrow.

We could all pick holes in these things but where do they really admit blame for any of what they have put us all through. There is an acknowledgement by them of being overwhelmed by the workload but absolutely no real apology from them to us for the frontier attitude they have approached us all with, or the total shambles of their procedures at their end. No apology, no voluntary refunds, shock at the fuss, these are not things i accept as an apology to move things forward. Only by fully accepting the blame and giving something back can they be taken seriously. All they are doing right now is fighting the fire and trying to stop the negative brand publicity, something that must be galling as Mr Lewy and his counterpart Tom Drury recently picked up an award for Best Business Products and Services. In the words of the presenter for that night, Judge Anthony Preston, praised the pair for having built the business, which has 100 staff, from scratch and developing "their own form of business alchemy, where they take bad debt and turn it into gold."
Bad debt indeed, thats all we are to them!

to see a happy picture of them accepting the award:

www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/483912-high-fives-as-e-amp-y-honours-entrepreneurs.html

Well I got a letter from their Legal Counsel today - referring to my letter of the 15th April. Assume this is my complaint - they just say they are 'investigating'. No deferral confirmation of my second deferral attempt sent at the same time though.........

@ Sarebear78

same here on a previous letter - interesting if you enter the legal counsel's details on this site

solicitors.lawsociety.org.uk/?Pro=True

Nothing earth-shattering or surprising - just interesting

Hello please could anyone help me out as got my decision letter back from erudio student loans today saying that a) my app to defer had been rejected b) they would be taking first payment out on Thursday and c) that they had used overtime payments as well as my gross pay to make their calculations! I rang them this morning and spoke to manger called Martin who was rude and refused to give me his surname as he said he may be at risk and it was not safe to do so? I advised him that I have never made enough at work to repay the loan to date and that slc has in the past always granted me a deferment based on my gross income being under the amount stated. He was not helpful and when I asked to speak to a more senior manager he told me that team leaders don't ever speak to customers! I Also formed him that my overtime is not guaranteed and could well stop tomorrow and is not applicable but he stated that they have added overtime to my gross pay along with child benefit payments and that I have to repay. My understanding of gross pay is that it is only the top line figure and that other payments like mileage which I also get but which varies lots and overtime which is not definite are therefore not relevant?.. I am a bit worried after reading all this fantastic helpful messages on here that as I asked him to put a hold on the first payment being taken ur of my account next week that he will now cancel my direct debit which then puts me in breach of the contract and they cud try and get the full amount off me and take me to court? The lovely Martin bloke told me that he had filled out a complaint form for me it that I wud also have to put it all in an email and tester to them? What should I do next as really worried? My first loan was taken out in 1996 and I am aged 40?

According to the BBC on October 31st, 2013:
"A list of the owners of "shell" companies where firms keep money offshore to avoid tax will be published to discourage tax evasion, David Cameron has announced."
This must have sent shock waves to companies like:
"Arrow Global Guernsey Limited
Registered Number: 49547
Consumer Credit Act Licence Number: 622921
Data Protection Act Notification Number: Z1552619
Arrow Global Guernsey Limited is registered in Guernsey.
Registered Office:
La Plaiderie House
La Plaiderie
St Peter Port
Guernsey GY1 1WG
Arrow Global Guernsey Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority for accounts formed under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended). It is registered on the Financial Services Register under registration number 622921."
Shock waves because they were already tendering for the Student Loans portfolio, the sale of which was soon to be announced. Not only that, but the company they had proposed as its Shell company for the sale was set up and controlled by The Wilmington Trust, which on its website states:
"Through our offices in the Channel Islands, we provide local management, administrative, and trust services for entities domiciled in the Channel Islands"
One would assume that set up a partnership between both of the above entities, and would put under threat the chance of not winning the sale of this loan portfolio, especially as the PM himself was on the warpath:
"This cloak of secrecy has fuelled all manner of questionable practice and downright illegality," he said.
"And illegality that is bad for Britain's economy too - as people evade their taxes through untraceable trails of paperwork.
He said the practice held back tax cuts for business as a whole: "To keep corporate taxes low, you've got to keep corporate taxes coming in. As I've put it, no tax base - no low tax case."
So, with that in mind, to some it must have been rather concerning when less than 1 month later after conducting its own due diligence test, The Department of Business Innovation and Skills awarded Erudio Student Loans Ltd the £160 million student loan sale, going in the face of the PM's new policy direction.
However, the PM had another concern about shell companies, which maybe this consortium of investors would not cross. The BBC noted:
The prime minister said making the register public would make it easier for firms and developing countries to know who they were doing business with.
Speaking at the Open Government Partnership summit in London, Mr Cameron said a small minority of companies have hidden their business dealings in a "complex web of shell companies" for too long.
However, only after being uncovered on these very forums, has it recently been admitted by all involved, including BIS, that Erudio always is just a shell company. Not in any previous BIS press releases, nor in the correspondences sent out to ex-students does the name Capita or its subsidiary Ventura appear, the very company, as it turns, who is processing all the deferment forms and taking all phone calls.
As such, one can only conclude that BIS's due diligence test must have gone directly against David Cameron's own personal policy direction when selling these Student Loans. With both of the worrying criteria seemingly in play on this issue, the dodgy Channel Island company connections and lack of clarity about who the ex-students were dealing with, surely it is time for someone such as David Willetts MP, to come out of the shadows and reveal the results of BIS's due diligence test and account for how and why he has unleashed this company on 45,000 odd ex-students who did nothing wrong, broke no agreements, fullfilled their end of the Student Loan agreement and always kept in touch with The Student Loans Company for the last 16 or so years. The only thing they have seemingly done wrong is not having earned enough money to start paying back their student loans. Surely, targetting the less wealthy amongst us, by setting the intellectual capitalist on to such ex-students is nothing more than bullying, turning those vultures who buy debt onto the minions, allowing them to invasively enter their lives and turn them upside down. After all, when has the buying and selling of debt every caused any problems, and who are the groups who end up suffering the most when that does happen? Answers on a postcard.