ERUDIO student loans help

Deroosanders

erudioed wrote: »

Hey, deroosanders' post was edited and the business email address of the carval guy has gone.[/QUOTE


Yes just spotted it, didn't realise I couldn't post them on here, don't see why as there in the public domain on websites, ah well!:(

gardenia101

Well I wish I'd found this thread last month - & thanks to all who've posted helpful advice. I'll briefly outline my story...

I require my correspondence in large print as I'm partially sighted. Before I lost some of my sight I imagined it would be easy to get such correspondence (how wrong was I :mad: It takes HMRC at least 8 extra weeks to generate tax credits paperwork in large print & certain banks haven't been able to comply at all. Yes I know this is illegal but I've had to many other battles to fight, so I've let it pass for now....)

When I was dealing with SLC (my 3 loans are all pre1998) they could never get their paperwork to me on time so my deferment always ran out, they always took a payment by d/d & I had to claim it back from them (never thought about using the d/d guarantee). My deferral was always granted as I earned well under the threshold, & the d/d was always refunded.

The large print paperwork sometimes wasn't perfect - once they sent me a letter with someone else's name on the letter, but they we're always helpful on the 'phone & each years' deferral was always sorted out.

I was aware my deferral was about the end at then end of July & assumed that my next deferral pack was delayed as usual.

So I was surprised to get a 'phone call from a chap asking for my SLC details - he told me Erudio (who?) had taken over my debt & he needed to speak to me about a matter of urgency. Only he couldn't tell me what that was until I'd confirmed some of my personal details with him... As he could have been anyone I said not likely, so he gave me a 'phone number to ring back. I thought the whole thing was a scam....

I did google Erudio & found they we're genuine, so rang them to find out what was going on. The lady I spoke to was very helpful - she confirmed they did have my address on file, did have my bank details (although they don't seem to be able to collect a d/d on it as "it's marked inactive on their system" - whatever that means. It certainly worked well enough for SLC & I haven't cancelled it.).

She couldn't explain why I hadn't received a welcome pack/letter about the SLC sell off/notice of arrears as my address was correct. I explained about the large print & when she looked further into it, she couldn't say if any of the missing paperwork had been sent in large print or not.

She offered to send me out an ordinary pack as it would be quicker, but I told her not to bother as I was still partially sighted & still wouldn't be able to read it

I was told that I'd missed 2 payments & that if I missed a 3rd it would affect my credit rating, so I needed to may a payment then & there. Wish I'd thought about it more at the time but I did make 1 payment by credit card as she went on about how awful it would be if my credit rating was affected (& I don't want this to happen). I was assured that I'd get the payment refunded to my card if my deferment was successful.

But if my last deferment ended on 27/07 how can I have already missed 2 payments?

No sign of any paperwork from them yet & as I'm expecting it to take ages I'm worried I'll be over the 3 month period allowed for deferment & in breach of my loan - allowing them to demand full payment.

I'm confident that I'll be below the new lower threshold, even including the child maintenance I receive from my ex (which makes my blood boil - this isn't MY income but my kids; he's never given me any maintenance for myself & I've never expected him to).

Any thoughts on what I should do next? I'm considering writing a covering letter with all the necessary info (maintenance letter from ex, last 3 months payslips, 3 months bank statement showing child benefit, tax credits going in but blanking other info as I don't think they need this). To my mind this provides all the necessary information they need to defer my loan - except it won't be on their darn form.

Pluthero

Start a paper trail with erudio. Get it all in writing, any dealings with them at all. They are a DCA! Never phone them!
If you do not use their form be ready for a fight! A quick scan through this forum will tell you all you need to know.

Welcome to the circus!:@

Just had a thought! Because you can't read their form you have a valid medical reason not to use it:-) I would draw this to their attention in any cover letter you use!

Happy hunting:-)

gardenia101

Right - having sat down & done all my calculations it now appears that from September I'll be over the (now lowered) monthly threshold - by £11. I've used the Sept figure as I won't be able to send off my letter & paperwork until my ex does his proof of child maintenance letter.

SLC always discounted this child maintenance as it was for my kids & not me, so they didn't treat it as my income - looking at the form TraceyJ posted there doesn't seem to be any distinction between spousal maintenance & child maintenance. Can anyone clarify this for me please?

If I can take this child maintenance off then I'll be able to defer, if not I'll be making payments of almost £100 pcm.

I'm sure I'm not the only one in this situation, & IMHO counting this as my income goes against the whole ethos of student loans - I haven't earned this money for myself.

I'd also like some clarification about when my loans will be wiped. I understand they'll be wiped when I'm 50 (which is only 4 years away now, but if I have to start repaying it will all be paid off before then) but I don't understand the 25 year rule on pre-98 loans. MSE says "earlier of 25 years after repayments were due to start, or when you reach age 50" & my first of 3 loans started in 9/93. Does the 25 year rule for this loan mean that the 25 years started from 7/94 when that first loan effectively finished?

Thanks in advance.

anna2007

gardenia101 wrote: »

Right - having sat down & done all my calculations it now appears that from September I'll be over the (now lowered) monthly threshold - by £11. I've used the Sept figure as I won't be able to send off my letter & paperwork until my ex does his proof of child maintenance letter.

SLC always discounted this child maintenance as it was for my kids & not me, so they didn't treat it as my income - looking at the form TraceyJ posted there doesn't seem to be any distinction between spousal maintenance & child maintenance. Can anyone clarify this for me please?

If I can take this child maintenance off then I'll be able to defer, if not I'll be making payments of almost £100 pcm.

I'm sure I'm not the only one in this situation, & IMHO counting this as my income goes against the whole ethos of student loans - I haven't earned this money for myself.

They are on very dodgy ground including child maintenance money as a borrower's income IMO, especially if the SLC never included it.

I have an FOI request in to SLC at the moment, asking for details of exactly what sources of income were included when they assessed deferment applications:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/assessment_of_deferment_applicat

It may be weeks though before SLC respond, which doesn't really help you right now. I know that another forum member, dizzybuff, was in the same situation with child maintenance being counted, maybe if she reads this she could post an update, or you could try sending her a PM?


Do you still have income details from your last deferment with SLC that would prove that they didn't include the child maintenance? If so, you could submit that to Erudio to show that it shouldn't be included as your income.

gardenia101 wrote: »

I'd also like some clarification about when my loans will be wiped. I understand they'll be wiped when I'm 50 (which is only 4 years away now, but if I have to start repaying it will all be paid off before then) but I don't understand the 25 year rule on pre-98 loans. MSE says "earlier of 25 years after repayments were due to start, or when you reach age 50" & my first of 3 loans started in 9/93. Does the 25 year rule for this loan mean that the 25 years started from 7/94 when that first loan effectively finished?

Thanks in advance.

The 25 year rule applies from the date your last loan was taken, so assuming you studied for 3 years and your last loan was taken in 1995, you would qualify for loan cancellation in 2020.

You therefore qualify for cancellation due to your age in 4 years' time, as that's the earlier of the two

ElwoodBlues

I've just found out that 'student loans people' have been telephoning my parents landline (where my student loan is still registered) to try and contact me. I don't know the details as I wasn't there to speak to them (it could have been Erudio or SLC, but more likely to be Erudio). I've never given Erudio a phone number, I may have given this number to SLC when I originally applied for loans (over 15 years ago). Bit !!!!ed about that, and I know it's going to cause aggro if they keep calling my parents!

The spousal income thing is a bit complicated and muddies the waters as far as income is concerned. Tax credits are done as a joint application, but each partner is itemised and paid separately. Fortunately for me, most of our tax credits go to my partner, although it's all paid into my bank account as my partner doesn't have one (she got a bad credit mark for getting in arrears on a mobile phone account years ago, and no bank would give her a current account, but that's another story).

Strictly speaking, loan deferment should take into account your income only, and not your partners (but even SLC's form used to have a box for 'spousal support'), but unless you declare an amount I don't see how they can come up with a figure themselves, and prove it.

Erudio are asking for bank statements as evidence of income. On the one hand I can see that from their point of view, it's a very good way to determine if someone is trying to hide something. But on the other hand, it's a gross invasion of privacy, and it gives Erudio (and therefore Experian, their partners in crime) a whole load of details about your personal finances that they would just love to get their hands on:

personal loans,
mortgages,
car lease payments,
mobile phone contract payments,
and even what day of the month your employer pays you.

That might seem like something mundane and irrelevant on the face of it. But if your finances are tight, it means that Erudio could change the date of their DD collection to coincide with when you are paid, ensuring they get their money before any of your other creditors.

These people are sharks, do not trust them, DO NOT DEAL WITH THEM OVER THE TELEPHONE (unless you are recording it, and know your rights inside out).

Pluthero wrote: »

Also they have deferred the guy who's wife was a solicitor which proves the universal adage ! Bullies don't like being bullied!

Does anyone have a link/further details on this please?

anna2007

Just remembered there's another bit in Erudio's response to my complaint re the FPN that others could use, which says:

"We can confirm that by signing the DAF customers are not giving consent to the FPN. The FPN permits information on post-1998 loans to be passed to CRAs. As your loans were taken pre-1998, the FPN does not apply to you. You can therefore apply for deferment without consenting to the FPN".

I'm sure they have said this because the FPN states that if your deferment application's accepted, then they can pass your loan data to CRA's (therefore no consent required). But that falls foul of the DPA on two counts - they need our signed consent, and they need to issue an FPN. As they've confirmed in their letter that the FPN is for post-1998 borrowers, and that I haven't consented to the FPN, they've done neither of those things.

It also mentions the recording of loans as "payment holidays", which might be of use too.

I've attached page 3 of their letter, as if you're going to use it, it's probably better to have the Erudio signature at the end of the letter too:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zswfmgjaqkkm90w/Erudio%20Response%20page%202.pdf?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/umwvtuxq94crr3t/Erudio%20Response%20page%203.pdf?dl=0

For the first page of Erudio's response, re the DD, see my post # 1453, page 73.

gardenia101

anna2007 wrote: »

They are on very dodgy ground including child maintenance money as a borrower's income IMO, especially if the SLC never included it.

I have an FOI request in to SLC at the moment, asking for details of exactly what sources of income were included when they assessed deferment applications:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/assessment_of_deferment_applicat

It may be weeks though before SLC respond, which doesn't really help you right now. I know that another forum member, dizzybuff, was in the same situation with child maintenance being counted, maybe if she reads this she could post an update, or you could try sending her a PM?


Do you still have income details from your last deferment with SLC that would prove that they didn't include the child maintenance? If so, you could submit that to Erudio to show that it shouldn't be included as your income.


The 25 year rule applies from the date your last loan was taken, so assuming you studied for 3 years and your last loan was taken in 1995, you would qualify for loan cancellation in 2020.

You therefore qualify for cancellation due to your age in 4 years' time, as that's the earlier of the two

Thanks for clarifying the 25 year rule - I never thought I'd be wishing to get to 50....

I do have some copies of covering letters I have sent to SLC regarding deferment (as I had periods of being on maternity leave/maternity allowance, employment &/or self employment & child maintenance payments. All of this info didn't always "fit" well onto the old SLC forms, so I always detailed why I was claiming deferment as well as filling in the form). I've always included a letter from ex confirming that the maintenance is only for children, & a line in my covering letter that SLC had previously informed me that I didn't need to include this in the figure as it wasn't my income.

I don't have anything in writing from SLC saying child maintenance can be excluded, as I was told this during a 'phone call. But I have never had any letter from SLC to say it must be included either, & I have had several years of deferment granted with sending a letter (& form) containing this sentence.

Looking back for the years I have copies of my deferment paperwork, it seems that I would have been granted deferment even if child maintenance had been included, as I'd still have been under the threshold. But they have never sent me any amended forms including the child maintenance figure, so I feel they have accepted that it isn't to be included by not informing me otherwise.

Does that sound reasonable to argue a change to T&C if Erudio decide they now want to include it?

I'm following your FOI request - will be interesting to see their reply.

anna2007

ElwoodBlues wrote: »

The spousal income thing is a bit complicated and muddies the waters as far as income is concerned. Tax credits are done as a joint application, but each partner is itemised and paid separately. Fortunately for me, most of our tax credits go to my partner, although it's all paid into my bank account as my partner doesn't have one (she got a bad credit mark for getting in arrears on a mobile phone account years ago, and no bank would give her a current account, but that's another story).

Strictly speaking, loan deferment should take into account your income only, and not your partners (but even SLC's form used to have a box for 'spousal support'), but unless you declare an amount I don't see how they can come up with a figure themselves, and prove it.

It's not Erudio's job to come up with a figure, you have to prove to them that any third party financial support is below the deferment threshold. SLC used to accept a letter from partner confirming this, Erudio want an actual amount, which will be half of any household expenses you're jointly liable for - mortgage, Council Tax, etc.

Half of our Child Tax Credit payment, strictly speaking, is my husband's, but I have always just declared the whole amount as my income, as it's paid into my bank account, but then my income's way below the threshold so it doesn't affect deferment. Think I'll just declare half for next year's deferment application though.

Child Benefit is paid to the main carer, which is me, so I suppose all of that has to be declared as my income (even though it's for the benefit of my children - I certainly don't see any of it - all goes on the kids' clothes and presents).

ElwoodBlues wrote: »

Erudio are asking for bank statements as evidence of income. On the one hand I can see that from their point of view, it's a very good way to determine if someone is trying to hide something. But on the other hand, it's a gross invasion of privacy, and it gives Erudio (and therefore Experian, their partners in crime) a whole load of details about your personal finances that they would just love to get their hands on:

personal loans,
mortgages,
car lease payments,
mobile phone contract payments,
and even what day of the month your employer pays you.

You don't have to give them most of this, unless it's to prove the level of financial support, e.g. the mortgage payment. Anything that is irrelevant to your application should be blacked out.

ElwoodBlues wrote: »

That might seem like something mundane and irrelevant on the face of it. But if your finances are tight, it means that Erudio could change the date of their DD collection to coincide with when you are paid, ensuring they get their money before any of your other creditors.

The DD is usually set for the day after your deferment ends - if this date doesn't suit you, don't agree to the DD until Erudio agree a more suitable date.

ElwoodBlues wrote: »

Does anyone have a link/further details on this please?

Fermi reposted this letter a few pages back.

fermi

It's only a few pages back, but I'll quote it again.

despin wrote: »

Alright then folks, a little update: I got deferred, no questions, no hassle. I did have the bonus of a letter from my wife, who does happen to be a lawyer. She looked at the terms of the original credit agreements and the new terms and knocked up a wee letter. I'll post a copy below. I also sent them a copy of last years tax returns, with all her details blacked out that showed my wages as €0. Apart from that, all they got was a letter from my wife saying she supported me, as with SLC.

I don't know if anyone noticed, but at the top of the DD part, it says to only fill in if your details have changed (mine haven't, so I didn't sign). I also crossed out the bit at the top of the DD and removed the bottom of that page and page 6 (thanks to advice from this thread.

Anyway, here's the text of the letter. It's a bit long, but worked for us, hope it can help some of you guys


Dear Madame / Sir

I hereby confirm that ….. is not employed nor self-employed. His only source of income
is the spending money (in the amount of xxx GBP per month) he is granted by me. He is fully
dependent on me and looks full time after our two young children.

Please find enclosed the Deferment Application form for my husband, ….... which we
have completed only to the extent this is in line with the original Credit Agreement and the law.
To set the context the Credit Agreement (1995) specifies that the applicable regulations provide for
(a) deferment of repayment (from a date and for a period determined by us under the applicable
regulations) if you satisfy us that your gross income ... for a month does not exceed a sum prescribed by the applicable regulations and that your gross average monthly income during the three succeeding months will not, or is unlikely to, exceed that sum...'.

Note there is no requirement to arrange a direct debit facility as part of this deferment.

The only provisions permitting a unilateral variation of the Credit Agreement in Clause 11 (Variation), specify that variations have to be deemed necessary (acting reasonably of course)'because of the provisions of applicable law and as 'required by applicable law.

No further variation of the agreement has been agreed by …..., save that the parties to the
Credit Agreement have over the years established a course of practice which gives Clause 11 an
enforceable meaning, namely that my above written confirmation is acceptable evidence of his (lack
of own) income status, absent any other suitable proof or legislation on this point. Furthermore, and
as a matter of law, you are required to act reasonably in handling deferment requests enshrined by law.

The terms of the Credit Agreement and applicable law (Consumer Credit Act 2006) therefore continue to govern the full extent of …... obligations.

ln summary, and to comment on your method of unilaterally attempting to introduce additional
variation to the Credit Agreement through the form you have mandated:

1. We are not aware of any requirement introduced by applicable law to arrange a direct debit,
nor to provide Erudio with this information

2. ….... is not required to offer any data protection consents to you and as such, he does not consent to the processing of information contained on the form except to the extent such consent is required by the Credit Agreement (his signature below is in evidence of this fact).

3. Your sole right by virtue of the assignment of the rights under the Credit Agreement is to require evidence to satisfy you (acting reasonably) that …...... gross income does not exceed the requisite threshold. …......... is entitled to continue relying on the established practice of sending my annual letter of confirmation as a satisfactory mechanism absent of any new legislation in this area.

Please note we have emigrated and are currently living at the above address. The address given on
the deferment application form is our UK forwarding address.