Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

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.

Erudio Student Loans Continued part 3

802 replies

erudioed · 30/05/2014 22:46

I dont know if this is the right way to do it and i apologise if it isn't but this is the continuation of www.mumsnet.com/Talk/legal_money_matters/a2057131-Erudio-Student-Loans-Continued

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
halfpricedebt · 25/06/2014 14:53

BIS will not give me the information requested in my FOI request. Apparently it would cost far too much money and there's far too many departments they would have to go through in order to retrieve that information. Sounds like bull to me.

halfpricedebt · 25/06/2014 14:54

Ooh, just saw that someone already mentioned my FOI request!

erudioed · 25/06/2014 15:31

That is a rather disgraceful reply i feel. It does look like a few people need to volunteer to file individual requests that break down halfpricedebt's original request into smaller component parts.

OP posts:
Sarebear78 · 25/06/2014 16:38

Well done on the original FOI request halfpricedebt - I couldn't remember which forum member it was who did it. What a load of balls - just trying to wriggle out of it.

Yeah, I think breaking it into smaller requests is definitely the way to go. I don't mind doing it - as long as I know which question I am asking so I don't duplicate. :)

halfpricedebt · 25/06/2014 18:22

I think we should organise who's taking what in that case. I'm going to have a look later, decide what to go with and update you.

It's a pitiful reply really because they could have answered a couple of the points if not all. If I was a member of the press they would cough that up in no time.

Becca19962014 · 25/06/2014 18:43

I think my MP office is looking into some of the things on that list for me. I'd ask but they are having a lot of erudio issues at the moment and very busy on my behalf and I don't want to annoy them anymore at the moment.

My news is Apparently they never gave me £25, yet that is what my bank statement and bank state. As We all know how helpful, consistent and useful the staff on the 'helpline' are Hmm so they are trying again.

Becca19962014 · 25/06/2014 18:44

To clarify it was Arrow Global in behalf of erudio who it states on statement gave me £25.

erudioed · 25/06/2014 18:51

I agree halfpricedebt, they should have answered what they could. I have a feeling they dont want to provide any answer, especially as every piece of info they do give will be under extreme scrutiny considering Crapita are making serious mistake after mistake right now, and Arrow's media responses are not convincing when you consider our actual experiences/interactions with them.
Lets hope we get some volunteers to help on this one. The more specific questions, the better, and the more there are, the more people can ask, and hopefully we will get a wealth of info!

I think you said it was relatively easy to fill out a FOI request, am i right? Maybe it might be better for people to PM you if they are prepared to help?

OP posts:
halfpricedebt · 25/06/2014 19:49

It's dead easy to fill out an FOI request on that site. I'm preparing my response to them just now. I'm also quite irritated they have called me a Mr despite never confirming my gender. Pretty incompetent all around I'd say!

halfpricedebt · 25/06/2014 20:03

Request updated:

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/due_diligence_for_the_purchase_o

midnightfrank · 26/06/2014 21:40

My situation:

Deferment said to end 24th May.

Applied for deferment using their forms and with signature. Received their end on the 16th April.

Not a pip or squeak from them - no effort on my part to communicate either - until yesterday when 140 quid was taken from my account.

Rang them tonight. Was initially told I had provided insufficient info and then within seconds - with no additional info provided, with nothing having changed - they said they had deferred me until next yr, apologised, and said the money would be back in my account within 3-5 days.

A shambles.

I have since rang Lloyds - who were as good as gold - to expedite the process and the money will be back in my account within 24 hrs.

I didn't ask for written confirmation, demand that the call be recorded etc etc since a not unpleasant person was on the end of the line and my civilised rather than combative instinct kicked in. Naive, of course, and we'll see if they stick to their word...

CelticPromise · 27/06/2014 15:50

And I'm deferred. Signed the form but blacked out the FPN and didn't complete anything I didn't think they were entitled to. I am supported by DH and they accepted a two line letter from him as evidence. I have no DD set up.

mandakl · 27/06/2014 16:29

@CelticPromise

Great result. :)

Sarebear78 · 27/06/2014 20:12

Great news Celtic promise - guess they didn't need my bank statements then (glad I blanked all his stuff out ) just my letter from DH. Next year....

Becca19962014 · 28/06/2014 13:48

I got a reply. Most of it is saying I have no right to the information I asked for (like the reply above). The £25 was towards the fortune it cost me to get a scribe to do the form.

They did say I can apply for a three year deferrment as disabled and that if I will never work it can be written off altogether.

So not all bad news. However, my MP is refusing to do anything else. They refuse to find out about other companies who bid - apparently that's none of my business, likewise the other questions I asked of them.

JaneParker · 28/06/2014 17:14

This is re. SLC (not erudio) but might be of background interest from today's FT:

Fake letters scandal spreads to Student Loans Company

By Sharlene Goff, Jim Pickard and Sam FlemingAuthor alerts
Almost half of student loans may have to be written off, MPs say©PA

Graduates falling behind on debt repayments were sent threatening letters from what appears to be an independent debt collection agency – but is in fact a pseudonym for the Student Loans Company.

The revelation is awkward for Vince Cable, given that the quango falls under the remit of the Liberal Democrat business secretary, who vigorously advocates high standards in the business world.

It emerged as Wonga, the payday lender, faced the possibility of a police investigation after it was found to have sent letters from fictitious law firms pressuring customers to repay their debts.

The City of London Police said on Friday that now an agreement had been reached under which Wonga customers would be compensated for the practice, it would “reassess” whether a criminal investigation would be appropriate.

Britain’s biggest payday lender was this week ordered to pay at least £2.6m in compensation to tens of thousands of customers who received the letters.

The FT can disclose that the Office of Fair Trading intervened earlier this year to ask the Student Loans Company to change the wording on its letters because they were potentially misleading.

Letters to indebted graduates had been sent with a masthead from an agency called “Smith Lawson & Company Recovery Services”, as highlighted by the Buzzfeed news site.

Some letters used phrases such as, “We are instructed by our client”, which appeared to indicate that Smith Lawson is an independent firm. There was also a Smith Lawson email address. Phone calls on Friday to the business were met with a voicemail that did not refer to the Student Loans Company.

Only in the small print at the bottom of the letters did it say that this was a trading name for the government body. The organisations share the same registered address in Bristol.

Earlier this year the OFT – which has since been folded into a new regulator – intervened to get the SLC to change the wording of the letters. “The letters?.?.?.?are no longer issued by SLC, having been revised following discussions with the OFT earlier this year,” the quango said. “This includes reference to the word ‘client’ in communications.”

Many graduates, after receiving the letters, expressed their fears online that their debts were in the hands of an independent collection agency – unaware that Smith Lawson was merely a pseudonym for the not-for-profit government agency.

The SLC said it introduced Smith Lawson as a “cost-saving exercise” because the use of conventional debt collection agencies required the payment of commission. Asked why the SLC did not issue the letters under its own name, the agency replied: “The use of a secondary brand is part of SLC in-house recovery process, all letters issued in the initial stages of recovery are all branded Student Loans.”"

SacreBlue · 30/06/2014 11:47

I came on to post about the latest news story re SLC like Jane. My deferment with Erudio seems sorted (though did get the threatening letter re complying just recently)

I think this latest scandal highlights the tactics that even the supposedly reputable SLC were using, so it's very useful to know about, to be able to call out any similar tactics if Erudio tries the same.

mandakl · 02/07/2014 07:39

Seems the government put their foot down and stopped SLC sending those letters now.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10936669/Ban-on-fake-Wonga-style-legal-letters-to-chase-student-debt.html

erudioed · 03/07/2014 08:32

There was another FOI request, other than the one mentioned above, that was filed concerning the price of the loan sale just answered by BIS:
www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/erudio_student_loan_sale#incoming-533491

I note they dont include any documents though, so maybe requests need to ask for the evidence/documents to back up BIS's claims!
We should pepper BIS with these requests to find out specific information. That way, we will collectively be able to find the documents/info we need to see if any dodgyness has taken place, as well as putting important info into the public sphere for journalists/ombudsman to get their teeth into and scrutinise...if they are interested of course!

OP posts:
catsmother · 03/07/2014 09:13

Hi everyone,

I came across this thread (and therefore links to the previous ones) purely by chance just a couple of days ago when browsing round the different forums, and have been absolutely horrified at the way Erudio are dealing with all the transferred student loans.

And seriously frightened too, because, like many others, I simply can't afford to have them swipe any money I'm not due to pay from my bank account - albeit that I'd eventually be able to reclaim it.

So .... my head is swimming as I'm really new to what's been going on (wasn't aware of any issues till I found this thread) and it's a lot to take in so I'd be very very grateful indeed if any of you could spare a little time to help me.

I literally received my deferment pack yesterday - my current deferment ends 19 Aug, for 3 loans taken out in 94, 95 & 96.

I've never earned enough to have to pay back and for the last 3 years have been self employed - working P/T and earning considerably less than threshold. I confess that in years past in just seemed simpler to tell the SLC my DP was supporting me (which he is really anyway 'cos my income is so low) and so I sent them the requisite and very simple letter from him and all was well. I want to stress that omitting to tell SLC I was self employed wasn't done with the intention of defrauding them or swerving any obligations, because I've never earned enough to repay and I want to make it absolutely clear that so far as HMRC are concerned I've always declared everything 100% honestly and paid tax & NI as required. My approach to the SLC was purely to simplify admin.

Now, though, I have no idea what they'd want if I were to claim my DP was supporting me. This info doesn't seem to be anywhere on their form or website. I have however read of partners being asked to submit bank statements and all sorts so really don't want to go down that route and I don't think my DP would want to do that either.

So .... I can send them my last self assessment form which should in theory be okay. But am now extremely worried - due to all reports of their incompetence and (deliberate?) oversights that this won't be deemed acceptable as I submitted it online end Jan 2014 for the financial year Apr 12 to Apr 13. My next SA must be submitted by end Jan 2015 for the period Apr 13 to Apr 14 but I don't want to do that right now ..... yet here we are in July 2014 and my concern is that they'll reject my last SA form because it's "out of date".

Can anyone advise me what my best course of action would be ? Should I submit my last SA form and send them my last 3 months bank statements showing monthly income received (I work on a consultant basis so this figure is pretty stable) and a covering letter confirming that my monthly/yearly income hasn't really changed since the last SA form and is well below the threshold ?? (.. my hourly rate hasn't changed since the last SA form anyway nor have the number of hours I work).

Would be very very grateful indeed if anyone would be so kind as to advise me .... I really just want to try and head them off at the pass so to speak by sending them as much evidence as they could possibly need (within the realms of what is right to ask for) right from the start so there are no delays to the deferment being granted.

Thanks very much in anticipation of any replies Smile

catsmother · 03/07/2014 09:19

Oh sorry, another question ...

Am I right in thinking that if I was under 40 when I originally took out loans in 94, 95 and 96 (which I was), then they are written off when either 25 years has passed, or, when I reach 50 ? Whichever occurs first ... because I'm 50 later this year anyway so if that is the case, I can rest easy in a few months time.

I wanted to ask because however much searching I do I keep finding contradictory info - though there is a table on MSE from which I've got the above and am hoping it's correct.

Sorry for all the questions - I feel very thick but I guess never really imagined I'd have to be thinking too deeply about student loan issues as when they were originally taken out the terms regarding repayment seemed very straightforward and until now, I have to say that the deferment process has been easy and pain free. If I ever had to call the SLC to check they'd received stuff, the staff were always polite, helpful, truthful and reliable.

lovecraft · 04/07/2014 09:55

HOW I GOT MY DEFERRAL

I took out loans between 90 and 95, have never earnt enough to pay back a penny.

Currently I do not work and am supported by my wife.

Originally I went the way of the no2erudio blog and sent the letter posted there along with annotated bank statements that only showed tax credits, cb, income from a second property which is rented out along with an amount of money my wife gifts me every month. She also signed a letter to confirm she gives me this. I sent no dd details.

As have many before, I received a letter back around 5 weeks after sending my stuff with another copy of the form saying I had to fill it in and sign it. In the interval I had discovered that as my loans are pre-98 they had every right to share them with a CRA so this meant I decided to fill in the form and sign it. All they got in addition from me this time in essence was the signature which seemed irrelevant as they are allowed to share my details anyway. I sent them no bank details and stated in a letter accompanying the form that I would not be doing so as there is no such requirement in my original terms and conditions.

I have subsequently received my deferment. The letter still states that I am in breach of my agreement if I have no dd but I have my deferment nevertheless.

calise · 04/07/2014 12:42

@Catsmother. I'm a SAHM. Erudio accepted a letter from my DH to say he supports me. They only wanted a bank statement to prove I got child benefit as I didnt have my award letter. I got a new award letter from HMRC but it arrived too late to go in my application. (applied online takes about 2 weeks to arrive)

Notonaschoolnight · 04/07/2014 12:58

God they're rubbish sent my deferment months ago heard nothing now I have a letter today wanting a payment after waiting to speak to someone I've sent this, I feel a bit crap sending it know but I was so mad;

This is a complaint, if you have a Customer Relations team you may want to forward this to them

My first dealings with Erudio

A deferment application form like War and Peace, why? The SLC was 1 page.

I completed the form months ago and heard nothing back. With the SLC in all the 17 years I'd get my deferment acceptance back and my proofs within a couple of weeks.

In the meantime, as a Mumsnet user, all I read is negativity about how bad your company is.

Months later I finally get a letter from you saying I owe you money?!!! I earn £100/week as a part time teaching assistant, as you know from your War and Peace form I sent back.

I'm now trying to call you, what am I doing? I never had to call SLC once in 17 years with a problem (obv your lines engaged, can't think why!)

Please reply telling me this is an error and everything's sorted and your service isn't as bad as you're allowing it to appear.

Please and thank you in advance

Ps I'm lovely really but can't abide poor service

Ibreakwindinerudiosdirection · 04/07/2014 13:09

@Becca19962014.

It is likely that they would have had the details from the SLC and paid you that way.

Yes your MP will refuse to find out about the other companies who bid. It is unlikely that anyone here will get that in an FOI request. 'Commercial confidentiality clauses' are one of the great wriggle-out excuses any organisation subject to FOI laws can use to keep things silent.

Swipe left for the next trending thread