ERUDIO student loans help

rizla_king

They daren't let you have it. Too much to hide.

dizzybuff

Just put a cca and a subject access request in for my complete file including tapes and transcripts of all conversations let see what that comes up with for starters.

cluelessfish

Has anyone had an annual statement from erudio yet. I received one from HSL over a week ago but nothing from erudio yet?

fermi

Interesting from one of the FOIs.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/225698/response/562041/attach/2/Deferments%20Reference%20Pack%20V13%20Redacted.pdf

anna2007

SLC have replied to the FOI request on assessment of income, child maintenance not included, certain benefits are (disability-related benefits, including DLA, are mentioned separately in the manual and are excluded):

"The following are included when calculating income.
Salary.  Overtime Payment(s).  Childcare Vouchers (Non-Taxable).  Allowances.  Profit share.  Performance Related Pay.  Holiday Pay.  Pension Payments.  Luncheon Vouchers.  Special/Additional Responsibility Payments.  Foster Carers’ Allowance.  Benefits (i.e. Child Benefit, Working Tax Credit, Children’s Tax Credit, and Housing Benefit etc. (Unless specifically classed as excluded on the reverse of the Deferment Application Form).  Bonus* *If Bonus is listed as Christmas or Annual; take 1/12th of the payment and add to each monthly payslip. *If Bonus is quarterly then take 1/3rd of the payment and add to each month.

The following are excluded when calculating income.

Arrears of Back pay (which cannot be allocated to a specific period).  Expenses.  Mileage.  London Weighting.  Any payment which is received and deducted in the same month  Non-Taxable Payments (although we do include pension payments and childcare vouchers".

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/assessment_of_deferment_applicat?nocache=incoming-562041#incoming-562041

erudioed

fermi wrote: »

Interesting from one of the FOIs.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/225698/response/562041/attach/2/Deferments%20Reference%20Pack%20V13%20Redacted.pdf

That is interesting. In the reply by BIS, i note the following telling section:
"Please note that these documents only apply to deferment
applications processed by SLC. Any deferment applications processed by the private sector fall to be processed in line with the debt owner’s own processes and guidelines."
That can only be Erudio...as such, there is no protection at all by SLC or BIS when they allowed these vultures control over the deferment process. This really will be emergency stations every year we have to defer. If it is correct, how can we ever expect consistency with such a group of thieves and self-interested call staff who are probably on bonuses or something like it, if they get us to pay when we dont need to.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/assessment_of_deferment_applicat

VonPaz

Has anyone had an annual statement from erudio yet. I received one from HSL over a week ago but nothing from erudio yet?

Not here! Although I note from their website it clearly states:

'We will send you a statement each year in accordance with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 2006, covering the period from August of the preceding year to September of the current year.'

A thought which occurred to me just lately; in all my dealings with the various privatised utilities over the years my letters invariably met with no response until I asked (in the letter) for them to furnish me with the relevant regulator's contact details. As Erudio are members of the CSA and are also listed on the FSA register it might be worth asking for the contact details of these two organisations every time you write to them.
I think they would ignore theserequests at their peril. It would be more ammunition if they did of course....

Pluthero

VonPaz wrote: »

Not here! Although I note from their website it clearly states:

'We will send you a statement each year in accordance with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 2006, covering the period from August of the preceding year to September of the current year.'

A thought which occurred to me just lately; in all my dealings with the various privatised utilities over the years my letters invariably met with no response until I asked (in the letter) for them to furnish me with the relevant regulator's contact details. As Erudio are members of the CSA and are also listed on the FSA register it might be worth asking for the contact details of these two organisations every time you write to them.
I think they would ignore theserequests at their peril. It would be more ammunition if they did of course....

That is a good idea. And then claim you never received them EVERYTIME or they were unreadable/the attachment did not open etc etc or would that be a stooping to their level

BaffledByErudio

erudioed wrote: »

That is interesting. In the reply by BIS, i note the following telling section:
"Please note that these documents only apply to deferment
applications processed by SLC. Any deferment applications processed by the private sector fall to be processed in line with the debt owner’s own processes and guidelines."
That can only be Erudio...as such, there is no protection at all by SLC or BIS when they allowed these vultures control over the deferment process. This really will be emergency stations every year we have to defer. If it is correct, how can we ever expect consistency with such a group of thieves and self-interested call staff who are probably on bonuses or something like it, if they get us to pay when we dont need to.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/assessment_of_deferment_applicat

Yep, @erudioed. Sadly, I would basically take that little disclaimer to mean Erudio can completely invent its own set of criteria for the permission to defer. Which is VERY worrying.
Every time BIS or any 'official' voice responds, the continual line is 'The terms of the loans have not changed' and 'The deferment process is a separate thing'.
It stinks to high heaven. I wondered months ago why, if it is so easy and legal to change the goalposts for us, did the government not play nasty itself instead of throwing us to the dogs? I wonder it even more now. If BIS had the right to change how deferment operates, why did it shortchange the taxpayer and flog off the debt to Arrow for such a low return? And if the terms didn't allow SLC to manipulate the deferment process, how the hell has a DCA been allowed to get free reign, following the purchase? At what point did the deferment process become annulled and then re-written? It doesn't wash. It's dodgy, whichever way you look at it!

ericctheking

Another case of miss-selling as the contracts are one-sided because with Erudio's view to a fincancial gain they have a conflict of interest in how the deferment process works or not works as in their lies etc.
With the government there wasn't this conflict of interest.
At the end of the day, it's a case of either pay up or play the poker games until court. I suspect if things went to court Erudio don't have a leg to stand on so this might not happen and they will just try to break people down.