Repaying Student Loans 2009/10 guide discussion

smelanie_2

Hi, My current salary is under the "repayment" threshold for Pre-1998 student loans. I do however receive rental income additionally for a property I pay the mortgage on. The tax office have deemed a percentage of this to be taxable. Should any of this income be included for repayment of student loan? As this would send my income over the repayment threshold. The SLC have only asked for salary information not any additional income. Please advise.

Poolie

When you complete your self assessment you have to declare all your income. You should state you have a student loan if you don't they will find out anyway and any additional repayment required will be deducted.

Hydromancer

I think that the repayment calculator should be modified to take into account those people on 5/6 year courses as in the current state it is kind of useless to me and perhaps some other people on long courses as well.

melancholly

Student loans have always had interest applied at the rate of inflation..., I don't know how you can have been told otherwise.... The argument has always been that they don't increase in real terms. To me, unfortunately this sounds a bit like you missing the point rather than miss-selling. Do you have your original paperwork to refer to? That will also explain your obligation to give them your address.

Have a read of the student finance guides on the main MSE site, plus go to the SLC website. It sounds like you don't fully understand what you signed up to, so arming yourself with that information is very important at this stage.

Dunroamin

Student loans have never been interest free and it's never been claimed that they are. I agree with Melancholly that you have misunderstood the concept of the loans increasing only at the rate of inflation; "paying back only what you borrowed" has never been the same as "interest free".

Dunroamin

BlueShoo wrote: »

It would be more helpful to have someone compare similar experiences or concerns than to just have you accuse me of being an idiot.

I clearly remember being told by the person representing SLC that they do not charge an interest on student loans. So perhaps that person didn't understand what they were talking about, or getting a commission for getting people to sign up to the loans and lying to do so.
I asked repeatedly and was told repeatedly that there was no interest and that only inflation would be met. Inflation is not interest. Interest has been added to my loan balance in hundreds of pounds each year. My point was that interest of £480 a year seems pretty steep for matching inflation rates that are apparently 1-2% on average, and that the % rates over the last few years are no longer stated on statements by the SLC which concerns me, and I would have thought it would concern others too.

I'm sorry, but it really is you who has misunderstood as my bolded phrase shows.

You obviously were told that the loans would rise in line with inflation and how else would that happen if not by a percentage being added? However, that doesn't mean that you owe any more today than you did when you took them out in real terms.

Nobody has missold you a loan and SLC advisers do not receive commission. How would you have studied for a degree if you hadn't taken out the loan?

ETA

You can see from this link the historical interest rates which have often been over 1/2% in the last 10 years.

http://www.studentloanrepayment.co.uk/portal/page?_pageid=93,6678642&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

Dunroamin

BlueShoo wrote: »

I'm getting the impression that your just here to be a critic of peoples questions.

I wonder why, if in real terms, that I wont pay anymore back than I borrowed, why I have never seen anyone have an annual salary raised by £400 a year to match this rate used by the SLC? And if, in real terms, interest and inflation are the same like you have basically just announced, then why I was told specifically that it was not, and why there are people including myself wondering why there is never a negative rate put on what we have borrowed? Your use of the phrase 'real terms' is actually quite strange.

And why question me on whether I would have studied should I not have had a loan?

If you cannot bring yourself to be bothered to explain anything and just continue to think of condescending useless responses then I suggest that you just don't answer at all.

I'm actually trying to be helpful, having had a student loan myself and also been a student adviser and had a lot of experience in discussing student loans with potential students.

My use of the expression"in real terms" isn't strange, it's the usual way of expressing this concept and you may notice that Melancholy has used it as well.

Trying to put it as simply as I can (and for people more economically minded than I am, I do know that this is a simplification!) if you borrowed £1,000 for a year and inflation was running at 10% then you would be paying back no more than you borrowed "in real terms" when you repayed £1,100 a year after you took it out. If this carried on for another 4 years you would owe £1,600 which would still be no more "in real terms" than the £1,000 you borrowed at the start.

Given the interest rates I linked to earlier, have you calculated what amount you think you should owe now and compared it to what you actually do owe? If you give real figures people would be able to check them with you.

Hope this helps.

melancholly

BlueShoo wrote: »

I'm getting the impression that your just here to be a critic of peoples questions.

If you cannot bring yourself to be bothered to explain anything and just continue to think of condescending useless responses then I suggest that you just don't answer at all.

You've been given advice. Fairly politely IMO, considering how irrationally angry you are about a situation caused by your own stupidity. There is a wealth of info out there that you have ignored and are basing your argument on a phone conversation with the SLC.... I also haven't ever seen student finance reps out there enticing people in.... It doesn't ring true plus your attitude stinks. There is no basis for yor complaint. Read up about this and empower yourself to take some personal responsibility.

Accusing others of being condescending rather than reading any one of a number of websites makes you sound like a sulky teenager. No sympathy I'm afraid.

Zeronet

Hope this the right place to ask the question.

Does anybody know how repayments work for SFE loans if you have loans from 2005 to 2009 for a degree course and then loans for a degree course started in September 2012? I currently have 19k worth of loans from my Bsc Geography which i started in September 2005 and finished in 2010 and i'm starting a 3 year Nursing Degree in September with loans of 2.3k a year.

Regards Mike

Poolie

Your previously loans would have entered repayment so you will have been sent paperwork confirming your status showing how you are funding yourself. SLC check on this more often to ensure people who are able to pay do so.