ERUDIO student loans help

Brooker_Dave

anna2007 wrote: »

I personally think a court would consider it unreasonable that you didn't complete the form

Is there anything in the original loan agreements that says a form must be filled in?

If we let Erudio get away with messing us about and lying this year, they make things even worse next year.

Has anyone on here heard back from the FOS re the form?

fermi

Interesting here

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=66084554&postcount=31

that Erudio suddenly discover arrears that would prevent a write of on age grounds as soon as someone reaches it?

erudioed

here is griffythings great petition to sign http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/63774

Make it compulsory for mortgages and loans being traded to be offered to the borrower before they can be sold to a third party.

anna2007

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

Is there anything in the original loan agreements that says a form must be filled in?

If we let Erudio get away with messing us about and lying this year, they make things even worse next year.

Has anyone on here heard back from the FOS re the form?

No, but processing our deferment applications will involve administrative processes, scanning the forms, etc, which gives Erudio reasonable justification for insisting on the form.

Have you used the SLC's form for x number of years? We had no complaints re the SLC's form as a means of deferring, it's the information Erudio are asking for on the form that's the problem, not the application form in itself.

I have no intention of letting Erudio away with anything, and I'll take them to the FOS and the courts if they attempt to alter the original terms of my loan agreement, or !!!! me about with their shocking customer service, but why complain about having to sign to warrant my declared income? I didn't like having to do it with all of the other stuff going on with the form, but recognise that they will argue the deferment can't be processed without the standardised form.

Whether we complete the form or not, we're all objecting to the same things, i.e. the information/consent requested. The difference is that if you've secured deferment (which at the moment can't be done without a signed form), then they can't claim arrears/repayments and you're free to rip into them with your complaint. There are already forum members in the situation where Erudio can recall the loan, of course they have no right to, and of course they will try, but why put yourself in that situation in the first place?? They're debt collectors !!!!!!.

Brooker_Dave

But debt collectors get paid in the main by scare tactics and lies.

It's becoming clear that we were *all* miss-sold these loans to start with, as I recall this was a special sort of loan that was from the government, near enough interest free and it would have any effect on my ability to get credit.

If they'd said that it was from a ruthless shell company based in a tax haven who would alter the rules whenever it suited them I would not have taken the cash.

Surely the solution to all our problems - which will get worse year by year as Erudio try anything to get money out of us, will be the miss-selling argument?

anna2007

@ Brooker Dave I'm with you on the misselling argument - I mentioned it on the Mumsnet thread and it was shot down because it's in the original terms that the loans could be sold to a 'third party'. As a naive 18 year old, I had no idea that could equate to 'debt collector', and think it's reasonable that we had an expectation that our student debts would remain with the Government.

The thing that particularly bugged me about this is that the original Student Loans Act (1990) was amended in 1998, just before the new IC loans were introduced, to specifically refer to sale of loans to the private sector - why do that when it would be repealed months later by the new legislation (unless to cover their own @rses)?

We're certainly not the only ones who feel that way about how the loans were represented and sold, but I'm not sure how best to go about challenging that?

anna2007

fermi wrote: »

Interesting here

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=66084554&postcount=31

that Erudio suddenly discover arrears that would prevent a write of on age grounds as soon as someone reaches it?

Ok, so far we have a ridiculously difficult deferment process, previously unheard of arrears, and goalposts shifting on the income threshold... anyone notice a pattern?!

fermi

The pattern that Erudio will use every underhand tactic they can to prevent you deferring, or pressure you into payments?

They are Arrow Global in essence, who are one of the most underhand debt collectors out there, so that they do this was never a surprise.

Brooker_Dave

anna2007 wrote: »

@ Brooker Dave I'm with you on the misselling argument - I mentioned it on the Mumsnet thread and it was shot down because it's in the original terms that the loans could be sold to a 'third party'.

But I'm sure at the time a big part of the student loans thing was that they would not effect our ability to get credit?

Clearly with all Arrows threats that's not so.

We were miss-sold?

anna2007

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

But I'm sure at the time a big part of the student loans thing was that they would not effect our ability to get credit?

Clearly with all Arrows threats that's not so.

We were miss-sold?

Yes, I remember that too. Would like to know what was stated in the student loans information leaflets /literature handed out by the Government/Uni at the time. I did try googling a while back but couldn't find anything.

Don't suppose anyone on here kept a copy??