ERUDIO student loans help
Comments
-
I think my understanding is that they had to extend the previous deferment period by one month, rather than simply allowing us to hand the DAF one month late, otherwise the legal right to backdate deferment by three months would fall to two. And the borrower would be left with fewer rights with respect to deferrals for that year.
To remove the one month extension this year would imply they backdated our deferment last year by one month without our consent or knowledge. And in preforming such backdating they would cause the two deferral periods to overlap by one month, which would, again, extinguish some of the deferral rights of the borrower.
I would think it would be a straightforward complaint to the FOS if those events came about.0 -
How did Erudio word it when confirming deferment, did they say deferment was in place for the 13 months or only 12?
We have no legal right to a 13 month deferment period and Erudio has no legal right to extend it by one month. If the new deferment runs for 12 months, Erudio have met their obligations under the Regulations, and they’ve also complied with the part in the Regs that says the deferment date will be no more than 2 months before or 3 months after accepting the deferment application. But the one month between the original end date and the new start date creates a gap that can’t be covered by the deferment provisions. I don’t think extending the deferment deadline would have meant losing a month of backdating? It was done so borrowers wouldn’t be disadvantaged by Erudio's 'mistake' in sending DAFs out late, so the full 56 days prior to the revised deferment deadline plus the usual 3 months after the revised date, where deferment could be backdated. And because there’s still that 5 month window for applying (just moved forward one month), there’s really no need to move the deferment period forward one month too.
I agree that FOS would likely be on our side, it’s Erudio who created these gaps and if later down the line they tried to claim the gaps weren’t covered by deferment, even FOS would surely view it as unfair. But I’m pretty sure these gaps are intended for when loans eventually qualify for cancellation years from now, which can only happen if no repayments are due (they could claim a gap in deferment = repayment due). With Erudio being exempt from FCA regulation, and the right to cancellation falling under the 1998 Regs rather than the CCA, we can’t be sure if FOS would look at the complaint years from now. That probably means taking court action and my worry is a court might view it differently as it looks like Erudio hasn't breached any loan terms by moving deferment forward a month. It’s the borrower's responsibility to apply for deferment, a court may well see them as also responsible for making sure the deferment periods run with no gaps?
If this is part of Erudio/Arrow Global's grand plan they would still have to give borrowers a chance to make the repayment they say is due – how many would just pay up to get the loans cancelled and be done with the scumbags? If there are 70k deferred borrowers, with an average monthly repayment amount of £100 (complete guesstimate), and some with more than one gap in deferment, that’s quite a profitable scam.
If anyone has these gaps in deferment created by Erudio, it’s probably a good idea to get them to confirm in writing that these gaps are of Erudio's making and they won’t be seeking repayment at a future date. If they refuse to confirm that, then they should be changing the dates so there are no gaps. Refusing to do that would seem reasonable grounds for complaint to FOS and gets it resolved now, rather than waiting until cancellation.
If all of that comes across as paranoid, it’s because I am
0 -
Thinking about it, this:If this is part of Erudio/Arrow Global's grand plan they would still have to give borrowers a chance to make the repayment they say is due
might not apply, when Erudio is exempt from regulation. All the more reason to get written confirmation that Erudio/Arrow Global are ok with any gaps in deferment.0 -
What do you mean?0
-
You need to be careful with Erudio and deferments. I was told (by Erudio) that once a loan had 'matured', they can't defer the loan and it has to be paid. They mature the loan after 6 months. Even if you send them your income/expenses form, they still mature the loan meaning you can't defer.0
-
CakeCrusader wrote: »You need to be careful with Erudio and deferments. I was told (by Erudio) that once a loan had 'matured', they can't defer the loan and it has to be paid. They mature the loan after 6 months. Even if you send them your income/expenses form, they still mature the loan meaning you can't defer.
Erudio can say what ever they like to try to bully their hapless customers into coughing up?
Surely all that matters is the agreement we signed up to?
And the the fact that we were sold a regulated product, that has now become unregulated - mis-selling."Love you Dave Brooker! x"
"i sent a letter headded sales of god act 1979"0 -
Brooker_Dave wrote: »Erudio can say what ever they like to try to bully their hapless customers into coughing up?
Surely all that matters is the agreement we signed up to?
And the the fact that we were sold a regulated product, that has now become unregulated - mis-selling.
You're right, but how many people have kept their original loan documents from the 1990s? I can't check what I signed up to as I don't have these (mine's statute barred and they have confirmed that they can't take any action, but I don't think everyone is on my boat). I don't think it's on that the goalposts were changed 20 years after these loans were taken out either.0 -
Sorry, FOS is the Financial Ombudsmen Service, you can make your complaint here
If Erudio passed the debt onto 'Moorcroft', that doesn't change the fact that you weren't told about the change of ownership from SLC to Erudio. They'll say it was sent to your last known address. You have proof of deferring by email for xx number of years and of chasing the status of your deferment with SLC. Definitely worth a formal complaint.
Not sure if this was directed at my replies or Brooker Dave's?What do you mean?
I think Brooker Dave was saying it seems unlikely that Arrow Global, as a big fish DCA, would transfer your loans to a tiddler DCA. Arrow Global are quite good at debt collection tactics (they're just really !!!! at student loans administration), why outsource? If Moorcroft (who nobody's heard of) are involved, I'd guess that's more to do with obscuring the link between !!!!!! DCA tactics and a buyer of government-owned student loans. Or it could be related to Erudio now being unregulated?
If you meant my reply to you - IF your debt was actually transferred to Moorcroft, it shouldn't have been, because SLC were well aware that you applied year after year by email. If address details weren't up to date, they knew it and were ok with that, so should have updated your address before selling your loans, if the same arrangement couldn't continue with the new owner of the debt. It's part of the t&c's that you keep them informed of a change in address, but FOS won't consider the legal side, it's more to do with what they see as fair and reasonable.
If you meant my 2 posts directly above your post, I was sounding off about the deferment gap which they tried with my first deferment. There's no benefit to the borrower in delaying deferment by one month and we've no army of barristers to argue against any change. Don't let them change any aspect of the original agreement, which includes !!!!ing about with the deferment date.0 -
Apologies have posted this is another thread but am having problem posting a new thread..
Hello All,
My first post so couldn't work out a way to post something new but I need your advice guys!!
Devastated! I have read through all the threads but no one seems to be in my position.
So moved house 3 years ago. On electoral role. Updated all that I moved and thought I had contacted SLC. I have a student loan from 97 to 99 (old mortgage style)
Tenant at old address says he has mail for me thats arrived yesterday, long and short of it is this is a County Court Claim from Drydan Fairfax on behalf of Erudio. which has not yet gone to judgment and i have just over two weeks as its start date is 15th March so I have 14 days past that and then another 14 days to pay the full balance or get a CCJ. Its for 10k so a large amount. It also says a default notice has been served on my but I have nothing on my credit file. Spoke to Dryden yesterday in tears and they were very nice but ultimately unhelpful although obvs not having correct address is seen as my responsibility and cannot cancel CCJ. This was all on a Saturday...yesterday so debt line could speak to me for long as closed at 1pm and Dryden Fairfax said legal team are only in mon- Fri. Barely slept last night and feel sick and have been trawling thread after thread
I am self employed and a personal shopper/stylist. I rely on good credit (this isn't in a contract just common sense with what I do) i also work with very high profile clients internationally who would have issue if they found out about me having bad debts (many of my clients are in Saudi) and have re built my credit as well as narrowly avoiding a CCJ not so long ago. I had a Tomlin/consent order put in place (because of the impact to my work) for this and want to do the same with Erudio but I have a few questions.
I deferred for years due to self employment but was told by SLC in 2014 that my loan had matured and could no longer be deferred. My last payment to SLC was 2014 so it cannot be statute barred I know i buried my head a bit by not following up with them so I know that untimely this is all my fault.
1) i have signed nothing with Erudio....can they enter a Default notice on my credit file?? I am petrified one is default letter that was quickly followed by the CCJ claim form (can they do this or is there a prescribed time) and it just hasn't gone on my file yet. Checked both Experian and Equifax and nothing. My point is that if a default has been registered with a CRA i am in trouble and i may as well let the CCJ go ahead rather than killing myself to try re pay 10k in 4 weeks! Has anyones credit file been updated will entries from Erudio?
2) As above can then CCJ be entered against my credit file as the loan agreement with SLC but although Erudio are technically the new creditor i have signed nothing. or will it be subject to the normal court process.
3) I have emailed Drydan and Erudio (who will make the decision as the client) explaining the effect to my biz and requesting as Tomlin order and an offer of £500 initially and a monthly payment to be agreed between us. The last at Dryden didnt know what one was but put me on hold and came back to me to advise me how to request this as she had found the process on their system. I guess i'm hoping Erudio will agree but driving myself mad by reading all the negative posts about them. I'm just praying that they will understand that without an income I will be unable to repay their debt and I'm not a home owner or have any assets really (no car). Any thoughts on this? Would I be better getting a solicitor involved?? Rather not as costs so much but better than the CCJ.
Any help so appreciated. Im in bits.
xx0 -
Lolalou76, you're not alone with this as it's been seen on http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?352-Student-loans-SLC forum.
I'd check out the few top threads to get up to speed.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 343K Banking & Borrowing
- 250K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.6K Spending & Discounts
- 235.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards