ERUDIO student loans help

Being_Sensible

Hi Everyone
I'm knew to this forum and wondered if anyone could help me with a concern I have about the changes to the mortgage style student loans which are now being collected by Erudio.

I've been deferring for the past few years but have steadily moved nearer to the threshold for repayment. Only yesterday I checked to see what the amount threshold would be for this coming year (my current deferment runs until November 2014) I was a bit shocked to find it had been reduced so much and will be £26,727.

My current monthly pensionable pay is £2411.50 which equates to £28,938 per annum. But due to pension payment contributions my payslip states that my monthly taxable pay is £2187,23 which equates to £26,246 per annum seemingly bringing my annual salary within the new deferment threshold.

Do Erudio (and the Student Loan repayment guidelines) use the taxable pay figure or the pensionable pay figure when deciding whether a person qualifies for deferment?

I also have a buy to let property for which I receive £7020 per annum gross income. Previously when I had spoken to Student Loan Company advisor's on the phone, they had told me I did not need to include this figure when making a deferment request, due to the actual income from the property being near zero (this is due to mortgage interest and other costs relating to letting the property) - in fact following completion of HMRC self-assessment I have received a tax rebate of approx £100 over the last couple of years (other years I have paid a very small amount of tax)

I'm wondering where I now stand with Erudio having taken over the student loan debt. Am I likely to have to make repayments once the deferment ends in November?
Much appreciated if anyone can anyone help clarify this for me.

gardenia101

anna2007 wrote: »

gardenia - Erudio have no need to know your middle name or previous addresses to process your deferment, they're phishing for extra information, that's all.

If they say they need to verify your identity when emailing (because ironically they're so committed to protecting your personal information!), your name, address and DOB is more than enough to allow them to do that.

Here is part of the email [FONT=Default Sans Serif,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]- Please be advised that in order to assist you with your enquiry we require your full name, date of birth and current address to pass our Authentication Process.[/FONT]

I thought it sounded a bit off, but as this is information that they should already have (via the SLC paperwork over the years) then I didn't feel I was giving them any new info; just making it easier for them.

JeLaw wrote: »

gardenia101 wrote: »

If this was posted earlier I've also missed it.

I've not actually had confirmation that all 3 of my loans have been sold to Erudio yet, I just know that at least 1 has or they wouldn't be contacting me.

It might be worth checking. Perhaps write and request that they send you the letter that notified us of the sale. You should have received this.

I still haven't had any letters about the sale at all, or any info about my loan balance, repayment schedule, account statements - zilch.

I made one payment for just over £90 - the last monthly repayment figure from SLC was £89 back in 7/12, so the payment figure seems right; I've just not had any correspondence to prove it.

I've had an email from them in response to my scanned letter for deferment/evidence so I know they've had it. They asked for some additonal information which I hadn't supplied (my middle names & previous addresses I'd lived at - hadn't thought to supply these as I have an uncommon name, & I'd given them my DOB, loan account numbers etc. already).

So they're continuing the attempts to delay deferment - for no valid reason. I suppose I should expect the same response from them in that case as I didn't supply that information (and don't intend to).
QUOTE]

Yes I saw it as attempt to delay deferment, although they would still have had 5 working days to mark it as received before the end of August, even if they don't actually finish dealing with it all that quickly.

Thanks for all the requests you've already made. I think I will ask. It's worth trying to find out as much as possible.

I second the thanks Anna.

RedKath27 - that is an outrageous story. I was asked to make a payment during my second phone call with them (first call I thought was a scam as I'd never heard of Erudio then & had no idea my loans had been sold off). During that call I made a payment by credit card as I was told I'd soon be at a point where I'd be affecting my credit rating (& I hadn't then read up on Erudio).

I asked if I'd be charged extra for paying by c/c & was told no, & the girl I spoke to told me they didn't record card details so I heard a series of beeps on the 'phone line while I gave my details. Quite why Erudio couldn't just use the d/d that has always been active (& used by SLC) I do not know, & nor did the girl I spoke to. She didn't say anything about additional charges for d/d to me either.

I have been checking my c/c account & only the one payment to them has gone out. Not that I'd expect them to take more, but you never know

I'm contemplating phoning them on Wed if I haven't heard anything from them. My last deferment ended on 27/7, so I assume the first repayment was due on 28/7 (which I've paid by c/c), & another payment was due on 28/8 which I've yet to pay - does that sound correct?

I was told that any payments I make now will be refunded if my deferment is approved - but I don't have this in writing.

Jonez

Personally - I wouldn't phone them - I'd keep everything in writing and full records of all communication with them. I used email to chase my deferment when they were being slow and it worked ok.

Redkath27

I have put in a FOI request to the Dept for BIS to ask them how exactly it was agreed that repayments should be calculated. I probably won't get a response, but am wondering if the amount appears to be high because of the way the interest is calculated, i.e. calculated daily and added monthly?

StressedHubby

Has anyone considered going to BBC Watchdog or Don't Get Done, Get Dom??

I am at this point seriously considering it, if for no other reason than to get peoples attention. The biggest problem I have with this is the actual paperwork side. My story, whilst getting worse by the day/month is not as bad as others but I do believe they would run a story IF enough people actually complained/flagged up the company.

Does anyone have a great command of written English that would cause production companies to sit up and take note of the problems??

Mr_McGuffin

anna2007 wrote: »

It was more the loans sold previously to Thesis Servicing and Honours - do you know if these included deferred loans (both of their websites say the deferment process is done by SLC, but it's not clear if they 'own' deferred accounts - it may just be ones with arrears)?

Yes, the 1998 and 1999 sales included deferred loans.

The loans were sold but deferment continued to be operated by the SLC. The sale agreement specified minimum collection procedures and a customer complaints process modelled on the SLC. Purchasers were obliged to provide a level of customer service equivalent to the SLC and the agreement provided for an independent assessor to resolve disputes.

According to the model of the 1998 sale agreement in the House of Commons Library (Dep/3 6271) the loans sold were selected randomly by the SLC by reference to the year of the loan and the category of the loans (deferred, repaying etc).

Mr_McGuffin

From Hansard, this is is what was intended at the beginning:


Under-Secretary of State for Education and Science (Robert Jackson) 'The Government are proposing a simple test which will rely on the honesty of graduates, and we expect it to be fulfilled. There will be a process of self-declaration, subject to sample checking. It is simple to ascertain graduates' income and how it relates to the threshold, which will be promulgated and announced. People will have to assess for themselves whether their income is above or below the threshold, and the whole process will be subject to sample survey.' (HC Deb 15 Feb 1990)


Top-up loans: rules & procedures, Department for Education and Science, February 1990
'I. Deferment
5. evidence of income:
a) self certification by borrower
b) supporting evidence must be produced: eg pay-slips'
House of Commons Library Dep 5749

This was the only 'evidence' required. The proposed sample checking would seek to verify income retrospectively in the form of a P60 or self-employed accounts.


Mr. Jackson 'The terms and conditions of a loan agreement will not authorise the Student Loans Company to investigate borrowers' incomes through their employers or banks. Borrowers wishing to defer repayments will be required to produce evidence that their income falls below 85 per cent. of national average earnings.' (HC Deb 12 June 1990 vol 174)


Mr Jackson 'The hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) asked about the use of the banks to verify graduate income... The Student Loans Company will not contact a graduate's employer or a bank for evidence of income, but it will seek evidence from the graduate.' (HC Deb 9 July 1990 vol 176)


Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v.1.0

erudioed

StressedHubby wrote: »

Has anyone considered going to BBC Watchdog or Don't Get Done, Get Dom??

I am at this point seriously considering it, if for no other reason than to get peoples attention. The biggest problem I have with this is the actual paperwork side. My story, whilst getting worse by the day/month is not as bad as others but I do believe they would run a story IF enough people actually complained/flagged up the company.

Does anyone have a great command of written English that would cause production companies to sit up and take note of the problems??

Please feel free to undertake such tasks yourself. Every little bit will help and who knows where something might lead, or whos attention may be piqued. Back in april/may time, many of us blitzed everyone we could think of. Only if we continue to do it, as a collective effort, based on our individual pursuits, will anything ever change. I know i have wasted more time on this than any human should have to, and i know i am no where near alone in that, so if anyone feels like picking up a baton please do so to keep up the momentum.

anna2007

Being_Sensible wrote: »

Do Erudio (and the Student Loan repayment guidelines) use the taxable pay figure or the pensionable pay figure when deciding whether a person qualifies for deferment?

It's based on gross income, so before deduction of, or relief from, tax - so will be the figure before deduction of your pension contributions.

Being_Sensible wrote: »

I also have a buy to let property for which I receive £7020 per annum gross income. Previously when I had spoken to Student Loan Company advisor's on the phone, they had told me I did not need to include this figure when making a deferment request, due to the actual income from the property being near zero (this is due to mortgage interest and other costs relating to letting the property) - in fact following completion of HMRC self-assessment I have received a tax rebate of approx £100 over the last couple of years (other years I have paid a very small amount of tax).

I know from others posting on the forums that Erudio are taking the rental income as the figure for assessment. You've said that £7,020 is your gross income, but my understanding of rental income is that deductible expenses are taken off, and what's left is your gross income, which you'll then be taxed on? It's that gross income figure that you should declare on your deferment form.

You haven't mentioned if you jointly own the rented property, but if that's the case, then only half of the gross income (after deductions) is yours.

There's a pending FOI request to the SLC on assessment of income, what is and isn't included, which should be helpful in your case (for both the pensions and rental income issues you've raised) - they're due to respond by mid-September:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/assessment_of_deferment_applicat#incoming-553892

anna2007

erudioed wrote: »

Please feel free to undertake such tasks yourself. Every little bit will help and who knows where something might lead, or whos attention may be piqued. Back in april/may time, many of us blitzed everyone we could think of. Only if we continue to do it, as a collective effort, based on our individual pursuits, will anything ever change. I know i have wasted more time on this than any human should have to, and i know i am no where near alone in that, so if anyone feels like picking up a baton please do so to keep up the momentum.

I think we have to keep blitzing the media, the regulator, the ombudsman, and everyone else, or the whole thing will eventually just fizzle out and our Government and their DCA consortium pals will walk away relatively unscathed.

The likes of Watchdog will take notice if they receive a large number of complaints about dodgy practice, so it has to be a concerted effort from EVERYONE who's affected. There are hundreds of thousands included in the sell off and near to 100,000 views of this thread, and plenty of p'd off people, so it shouldn't be difficult to generate some interest - IF enough people take the time to send off an email.

I covered many of the Erudio issues in my complaint to the FCA, I can post them up along with the previous mailing list as a template for the media - but it's important people adapt it to their own situation, give examples of what's happened to them. I think that would have more impact than a template email?