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?

Hi, I've been following the discussion here for a couple weeks now, but not posted on the thread (or Mumsnet!) before. I've been stalling on sending my deferment application as I just can't decide how best to approach it, my current deferment ends 9 June.

Apologies if this has been raised further back in the thread as I haven't had time to read through all of it. I've been looking through the legislation and it looks to me that there was a whole new section added at 1A of the 1998 Act - Transfer of public sector student loans to the private sector - which wasn't in the original 1990 Act.

1998 Act: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/1/section/1/enacted

1990 Act: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/6/contents/enacted

I can't see anything in the original Act or Regulations that allow the government to transfer the debt to a private sector company, but schedule 2 of the original Act, headed "Administration", 3(7), states "Any person or body having the function of recovering loans under the arrangements may, for appropriate consideration, assign the right of recovery to a third party". So, perhaps the addition of 1A was to give clarification to the term "third party", which seems pretty ambiguous (especially to a student, taking out a loan with the Goverment, who might have a reasonable expectation that the debt will remain with a public sector body)? I know that legislation is repealed and replaced all the time, but it seems to me that the addition of 1A gives the Government an obvious advantage and is extremely detrimental to the borrower, and those of us who took out pre-1998 loans never signed up to it.

Sorry for rambling on here, but it was Qubit's comment about Erudio being so insistent that we sign their form that got me thinking about their motives. I'm no legal expert, so just speculating here, but could it be something as fundamental as obtaining consent from us for Erudio, as a private sector company, to take over our loans, as there was no provision for this in the original Act that governed our loan agreements? And by signing Erudio's form, we are acknowledging (and accepting) that they own the debt? However, I would have thought that writing a letter requesting deferment could be deemed to be acceptance of Erudio as owner of our debts, I really don't know for sure.

I haven't had a chance to look at the Consumer Credit Act yet (and may well lose the will to live if I do so), but maybe there's some requirement in there that Erudio have to obtain the borrower's signature, with date, before they can take any action against us?

I hope all of that made some sense! There may be no mileage in any of this at all, but just thought I'd put it out there to see what others think and whether any of this could potentially be used against Erudio.

Bloody good post minimoosh

The don't need your consent to sell the loans.

See the Sale of Student Loans Act 2008 www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/10/contents

Transfer arrangements such as the sale to Erudio and the previous ones to Thesis and Honours student loans can be made under that act without consent or notice to the borrower.

The legal assignment that takes place as part of that transfer arrangement also does not need your consent, but you do need to be sent a notice of assignment. Only sent though. You have no part in agreeing to it. It happens whether you like it or not.

Sorry to say it, but thinking they need your signature on the forms to somehow make the sale legal is barking completely up the wrong tree.

I read you recent post with interest @halfpricedebt Did I understand you right, your application to defer was by letter and not their form? If so, and you get the confirmation in writing you've asked for that would be great news all round.

@simonpimpernel

Please try again with the FOS. The chap I had was foreign tounged and hadn't heard of Erudio however he checked on his database, I mentioned Capita and Arrow Global too. He told me his colleague next to him (obviously hearing his side of the call) was nodding his head as if to say they knew about them.

I sort of feel a bit better about things now the FOS have taken up my case and they couldnt state strongly enough that if Erudio did not comply to the collection activity suspension until my complaint was resolved there would be serious consequences for them.

My complaint is that I had heard nothing from them since they signed for my recorded delivery letter on the 8th April and only after contacting them by telephone today I found that my file had been marked as incomplete on 17th April. No contact what so ever. I am now 9 days until deferment ends with nothing in place for the next period of deferment.

I hope others will try FOS for help, they are open until 8pm in the evening. The more calls they get the more it helps all of us..

I penned a strongly worded reply to Erudio today and enclosed a separate letter to lodge an official complaint. I've given them 5 working days to respond confirming my original deferment application will be successfully processed. That takes me up to the end of my current deferment period. I've asked for my complaint to be considered on a separate timescale. I plan to contact the FOS at the end of the 5 days. I might even wait and see if they try to take a payment as that's a stronger complaint.
I've written to my MP. The constituency is a Labour stronghold. Do any other posters with active complaints know if they have a Labour MP with a small majority? An MP campaigning hard to keep their seat might be more eager to pick up the story.

@Maccygee - yes, I copied and adjusted a letter another poster put on one of the discussion threads clearly stating my right to defer according to legislation. I've given them exactly what I would have given SLC - as everyone keeps telling us the sale hasn't changed a thing, I made sure that I submitted my application with that in mind.

I crossed everything out on their form and only added my name and address. Everything else was crossed through with black marker pen and "do not consent" written all over it.

They've since claimed they needed more information after telling me a letter from my employer was enough, then I gave them two payslips and another letter from my employer stating when I started work and my salary. They asked for that and then claimed my application was incomplete, they couldn't read my payslips and my employer didn't add my start date (my payslips were highly visible and my employer did include that information).

I told them if they were unable to read clear information then that was their problem, not mine, and reiterated that I am eligible to defer under the relevant legislation. I tend to treat it like a game now. If they want to try and take me to court if they claim there are arrears on my account (my deferment period is currently over), then they can and while they're at it they can show how long it's taken them to process information, how slow they've been to update my records or me, and generally how utterly incompetent they are. It will cost them far more than it will cost me.

If anything I think it would be far easier for borrowers to drop off erudio's radar without ever paying a penny because they clearly don't update records or have effective procedures. They're idiots and I will treat them as such until I'm 43.

@halfprice

You seem to have had a much more "amusing" erudio experience than me. Lol... honestly what a fecking joke the whole thing is. It amazes me how they manage to operate a computer let alone a huge loan book bought from the government.

Clowns! !

Hello,

I found this site and thread for the first time after google-ing Erudio Student Loans deferment timescales as it seems to be taking so long. I really wish I had found it sooner :o(
I sent my application for deferment off on 14th April and I am still waiting for a response. I sent it recorded delivery and had signed delivery for 15th April, but still it took them until the 24th to scan the thing and acknowledge receipt.
I am now having kittens about the situation with the credit reference agencies.
When I recieved the deferral pack I, like everyone else, was not happy. I phoned them regarding the situation with the DD and sharing info with the CRA's. In regards to the direct debit, I argued my case, made several phone calls and they eventually said that I do not have to supply a DD mandate (despite the form stating it was mandatory) if my application is submitted in full and all supporting evidence supplied. The last girl I spoke to also said that so long as I am not 'high risk' by their standards, DD are not necessary. I didnt fully understand this. It seems to imply that they will be credit scoring us to defer?? Am not sure how they can get away with that.. Or I might just be being stupid...
So anyway, I submitted my application with a covering letter explaining why I have not signed the mandate and all evidence was supplied (all expertly blacked out as much as possible, so it only showed my name and credits). Unfortunately I signed the form. Because I didn't think I had any choice!
I am now extremely upset about this, due to what others on here have written. I feel duped and extremely stupid. And also very worried about what effects this will have on my credit file.
I have a beautiful shiny credit file which I have been so careful to maintain. I don't want it messed up by some crappy company who in my head I didn't borrow money off of in the first place making reference to a loan that shouldn't even be on there.
The govt always said that student loans are NOT the same as a normal loan, credit card or mortgage. Therefore they should not be mentioned unless you are in arrears.
It makes me so angry that they have been so underhand about it all.
I am really wondering if anything can be done retrospectively? Or if I have signed the form, I am guessing I am doomed forever. :o(

Does anyone else also know anything about where we stand with the debt being written off at the age of 50? Is this something that Erudio will be changing? And also if you make payments to the loan, does this forfeit the loan being written off in later years?

Any help or advice would be greatly received as I am really quite stressed about this now :o(

Thanks

They are meant to be sad faces through out that post by the way... Not smiley ones!!!
Just found the key below....

The age write off ate 50 or 60 depending on what applies to you is set down in law and the loan agreements.

Erudio cannot change it, remove it, or refuse it.

That is VERY certain.

I would agree @halfpricedebt Their antics won't hold any water in court which they must know themselves.
Sorry to apparently ask you the same thing again... did you sign their form then, with the parts crossed out etc?
Good to hear you finding amusement in it. That's the spirit!

What about the 25 year rule? I thought it was either 25 years of deferment or 50 years of age whichever came first. Perhaps I got that wrong though.

@Becca19962014

Yes. Missed that one out. Sorry.

It's when you reach 50 when your last loan was taken out when you were under 40. Or 25 years after your last loan if that happens to be sooner.

Or if you were 40 or over when your last loan was taken out it is at age 60.

Thanks for the clarification!

Thanks halfpricedebt :), though looks like I was way off - thanks mandaki for the info and link, I wasn't even aware of that Act. I had a quick look at it and saw the Act extends to England and Wales only. I'm in Scotland and have tried to find the Scottish equivalent, but can't see anything - do you happen to know what I should be looking for mandaki?

If there's no sinister legal reason for insisting on a signature on an otherwise blank deferment form, then my guess is it's just another sinister stalling tactic. Given that deferments can only be backdated a maximum of three months, I'm convinced that Erudio are intending to delay as many deferment applications as they can, for as long as they can, and then claim you're due a repayment for the period not covered by the deferment. I'm not saying they're entitled to do this (they owe us as their customers a duty of care to ensure the deferment applications are processed in good time), just that they will try to, along with every other trick they can think of. Three months might sound like a stretch, but they're already putting applications 'on hold' for 8 weeks, and using any excuse to do it, e.g. if you've raised concerns, rather than formally complained. Add to that their apparent staff incompetence or lack of training (which I don't believe is the case, they know exactly what they're doing), their new systems bedding in, blah, blah, blah.

To put this into context, if they only got one repayment out of every deferred borrower using this tactic, by my (very rough) calculation it would bag them around £6.9 MILLION. Not a bad earner, considering they're not entitled to a penny of it. Getting their grubby mitts on our money is their primary objective, but they hope to wear us down in the process, to such an extent that, if they do manage to get repayments in this way, many won't fight to claim it back.

All of the above is a shorter-term strategy of Erudio, what they really want is to get their grubby mitts on ALL of our money by saying we've defaulted, by breaking an obligation of the loan agreement. That way they can recall the whole loan and/or claim we no longer have the right to cancel the loans after 25 years/age 50 - the loan agreement states the loans will be cancelled so long as you don't break ANY (their emphasis) obligation under the agreement. I'm sure this is why Erudio insist the DD's a requirement during deferment on the mandate - if they can't get you on outstanding repayments, they'll try to use the failure to set up a DD against you.

If this is indeed Erudio's strategy, then the best way to put a stop to it is for everyone to do as others have suggested and make use of the FOS/FCA/your MP/the media to complain and put pressure on Erudio to back down. It probably won't put an end to their sharp practice forever, but they might just back off long enough to get our f'n deferment applications approved!

@ Becca - you're right, the loans can be cancelled after 25 years of deferring the last loan taken out, or age 50, whichever is sooner.

THANK YOU for the clarification re Age related Write offs.
Very good news!

My deferment isn't due till December.
Due to surgery later this year, I expect to be in a position to defer again.
Currently, they only have my name and address. NO phone number.
And NO bank details.

Do I wait for them to send forms?
Do I send deferment details?
I don't want to sign a form if it means they have any more hold over me than they have now????

thanks

@ mandakl - so sorry, just realised I got your username wrong - I need to put my glasses on!

Just checked the loan agreement re cancellation and there is no emphasis on the word "ANY", I must have just read it like that in my mind :)

No probs Maccygee, I didn't sign the form. I felt that signing it meant agreeing to their terms which I don't.

You've got to treat it like a giggle really otherwise you'll go bonkers. I find it helps to put thinks in perspective - if you're eligible to defer there's nothing they can do. I'm eligible to defer and they no longer have access to my account while they deliberate and fanny about organising a piece of paper to send me.

I have no time for a company who bought my debt for an eighth of its original worth who then have the audacity to ask me for 100% of what they didn't even pay for - especially when they can't even show the rest of us common courtesy. As far as I'm concerned I'll continually write them silly emails (I recently asked them if they thought Mickey Mouse would do a better job than their admin department after being told they would deal with my additional deferment information within 21 days) and be sarcastic with their call centre staff. It provides me no end of laughs. You might as well get some entertainment out of it or you'll cry.

Interesting what someone said earlier about high risk accounts. I was y

Told mine was low risk. Would be good to know exactly what these risk factors mean. I assumed it was because I've always updated my details and all that. I would imagine those who dropped off the radar will be higher risk but that's just a guess.

You know what I've just realised? This whole deferment process has taken over two months for some of us. Surely that is something for the ombudsman?

Isn't the signature on the form serving the same purpose as a signature on any application form - that you are declaring what you've said to be truthful, etc.?

I see that common worries are the form, the signature, the DD, the CRAs, etc.

I didn't take issue with any of that, I did it all as requested. I am much more worried about how this deferment process will go in the future, at the end of each 12 months, and then how the cancellation will go.

Like many others are still saying is the case for them, my deferment application was not going to be looked at until after current deferment ended, so repayment collections were going to begin. I complained about that as unreasonable treatment (especially since the letter of assignment from "Erudio" said "you will not be inconvenienced" [by the transfer process]), and because "Erudio" had been so difficult to deal with, I didn't wait to involve FOS, I got them to back my complaint from the outset.

I believe that it was because I involved FOS from the beginning of my complaint that my deferment suddenly got processed and granted. That may be good news, but it hasn't changed much really, there's still a lot of worry ahead in dealing with this "company" for future deferments and cancellation. The latter feels like it will be a mirage, judging on current goings on.

I've got so many thoughts on this but I'm not good at getting to the point, so I'll wrap it up for now.

I just want to say that even though I made it through the deferment process this time, I'm still intend to progress my complaint, because all the concerns I've had still apply.

I also intend to contact my MP. He is a Tory, but my Mum suggested it, and she said that shouldn't matter (don't forget Labour sold off the first tranche of old style loans in 98/99...?) Also, I've been encouraged by posts here that it's worth contacting MP.

I am still trying to get BIS to speak to me, but I don't think they will. Maybe they will if I go through my MP.

Basically I'm going to try everything I can think of. My deferment granted has given me some breathing space and taken the pressure off, but I'm still upset that so many reports here of rubbish treatment. Also, I've discovered a new pastime! (although I shouldn't keep staying up so late).

Good luck everyone

Signing the Deferment Form -

The "Borrower's Warranty" on Erudio's form is 100% identical to that on the old SLC form.

I signed it - no problem with signing to say that the information I provided was true.

Otherwise - I crossed out the FPN and only provided the exact same info that I gave SLC the previous year - so no homeowner status, tel nos etc etc.

My loans are all old so, as I now understand it, Erudio are 'permitted' to contact CRAs anyway, although to my mind, that does constitute a change to established practice.
I wrote an accompanying letter saying I did not consent to any changes in the T&Cs and wrote that again under my signature on the Form

I was deferred after a month waiting. I'm not saying that's the right way but it worked for me.

I did not phone or email Erudio.

Oooh very interesting Halfpricedebt! It sounds like you've been deferred without signing their form then, although I think you are right to hold off a thorough celebration until you get that in writing but absolutely brilliant news if you do. Well done to you I'll wait eagerly to hear about your confirmation. If that's the case then they're treating me and Simonpimpernel differently to you without any explanation. That would make interesting reading for the FOS :D