MSE_Dan wrote: »
We've worked on this a bit more now, and have changed the assumptions to be nearer what you discuss (was always the plan to get one version up then refine in time for the weekly email)
We now do grad earnings rising at RPI+2% yearly, and the payment thresholds going up at RPI+1%. These both closely match the best ONS stats we could find - though earnings statistics have always been bizarrely hard to pin down
What's struck me during the process is how marked the changes caused by a tweaked assumption have been. It will be really interesting to eventually find out the levels set by government, and how they affect repayment amounts and timescales.
kayr wrote: »
No, but the Guardian estimated an average of about £8.6 K and my own experience is that none of the universities my son is considering have set their fees at less than £9k. So I think setmefree2 is quite sensible to suggest that a table based on £9k fees would be more helpful.
MSE_Martin wrote: »
In point 1. I think you've misread the assumptions.
We assume an individual graduates growth at RPI+2% of salary (this incorporates the fact that graduates tend to gain in seniority as they age - but factors in that some won't and some will take time off)
Yet we assume the thresholds go up with average earnings which we have as RPI+1% which is historically roughly right (actually slightly higher)
In point 2. While you are technically correct this is an extremely unlikely scenario.
I think it is perfectly possible the scheme will be changed for new starters in the future. Yet we have never seen previous versions of student loans changed from their outset position (ie pre 1998 students still pay that version, post 1998 pre 2004 their version etc). So I disagree that this is likely going forward, the policy has always been that they stick with what was said at the point of study start.
In point 3. Same answer as above - that legislation is to enable future schemes to change - it is not about changing conditions for those who have already contracted their course.
The_Baroness wrote: »
Can someone pls explain why, if it is the student who is taking out the loan, parental income is taken into account when setting the amount of living cost loan they are eligible for?
lsur02 wrote: »
Based on my own experience of the Student Loan Scheme, I would advise prospective students to be very careful indeed before signing up. The Scheme has been mis-sold since the outset. It is not clear, for example, how long the loan is meant to cover each year - is it a full calendar year or just 30 weeks of the academic year? How will you pay the rent for the rest of the year, especially with unemployment being so high for everyone, young people included. You will have no rights to any form of social security.
Also, you don't necessarily know how much your rent and other expenses will be - the University I attended charged very high rents for so-called student accomodation to cover the costs of their recent building programme. Students unable to get their first choice had to hand over their entire loan cheque at the beginning of term and were left dependent on family to live.
The deferrment of repayments is not hassle-free. You will be required to tell Europe's biggest debt collector a.k.a the Student Loans Company, where you are at all times and all details of your income and expenditure. If you move or travel when the repayments are due, they will first of all pester your next-of-kin for your wherabouts and then obtain a County Court Judgement against you and be able to send bailiffs round. This process will, in many cases, follow you for the next 30 years!
Martin's Guide does not give these facts and seems, no doubt from good intentions, to play into the hands of the politicos behind the scheme. You should give the full reality, which is that study in Britain is designed now for those with money behind them and no one else need apply.
If you are academically able, consider courses abroad (there are some in Holland, for example, set up for English speakers) or work for a while and have your own money behind you before studying. You don't need to get a degree straight from school. Indeed, part of the mis-selling has been to imply that all degrees are equally valuable - they cannot be if the market is flooded with graduates, that is basic supply and demand economics.
Finally, has no one considered challenging the SLS legally on the grounds of mis-selling? It is a nasty scam and only suitable for a minority of students. Take care before you get caught with lifelong debt!
If you plan to get a place via 'clearing'
Lower your band & save £1,000s
Past-best-before health food etc