ERUDIO student loans help

fermi

BaffledByErudio wrote: »

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.

Criteria for whether you are entitled to defer are set down in the loans agreements and in statute.

If you meet them you are entitled to defer.

Procedures to access that may differ, but do not override the basic legal criteria.

Sorry to nit pick on that point, but it is rather crucial.

As not set down in law, if Erudio's procedures are wrong, unfair or onerous, then they are cause for complaint and/or taking to the FOS.

ericctheking

No other loan has deferment like this. These loans are unique.
How can the clear conflict of interest be even legal with Erudio being a profit seeking entity?
How can the say of if deferment is approved or not be down to Erudio?
Shouldn't people take the view that if they are under the threshold and have provided evidence then they are deferred. What does it matter if Erudio approve it or not? What does it matter if Erudio say you have arrears? What does it matter if you ignore their DAF?
If they want to try and get money then they can go to court. Until then why not cancel those DDs and not pay them one penny if you are under the threshold?

ericctheking

Also for people with child benefit issues I don't think it matters if the SLC courted them. Perhaps they shouldn't have.
Income included should only be taxable income.

magpiecottage

Those of you getting a "we can't open the attachment" response should remember that the FCA's glossary defines a complaint as, "any oral or written expression of dissatisfaction, whether justified or not, from, or on behalf of, a person about the provision of, or failure to provide, a financial service or a redress determination, which:
(a) alleges that the complainant has suffered (or may suffer) financial loss, material distress or material inconvenience; and
(b) relates to an activity of that respondent, or of any other respondent with whom that respondent has some connection in marketing or providing financial services or products, which comes under the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service."

This can be seen here. Provided the actual e-mail said you were dissatisfied, the 8 weeks to sort it has begun.

However, you ought to co-operate with them.

I suggest you do not send word documents as attachments. Convert them to pdf as it is far more difficult for them to alter later.

gardenia101

cluelessfish wrote: »

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

Nope. Mind you I've only requested it 3 times now..

rizla_king wrote: »

What format was it?

Yes the cant open the attached document thing is one of their standard delaying tactics. Complete bullsh!t normally.

Here I will prove how computer illiterate I am :rotfl:

The original document is a .odt file (using OpenOffice) which is magically converted to another file at work (using Word). Not sure what type of file as not at work today.

magpiecottage wrote: »

Those of you getting a "we can't open the attachment" response should remember that the FCA's glossary defines a complaint as, "any oral or written expression of dissatisfaction, whether justified or not, from, or on behalf of, a person about the provision of, or failure to provide, a financial service or a redress determination, which:
(a) alleges that the complainant has suffered (or may suffer) financial loss, material distress or material inconvenience; and
(b) relates to an activity of that respondent, or of any other respondent with whom that respondent has some connection in marketing or providing financial services or products, which comes under the jurisdiction of the Financial Ombudsman Service."

This can be seen here. Provided the actual e-mail said you were dissatisfied, the 8 weeks to sort it has begun.

However, you ought to co-operate with them.

I suggest you do not send word documents as attachments. Convert them to pdf as it is far more difficult for them to alter later.

Thanks for that - my letter certainly mentioned the word complaint a few times.

Hadn't thought about them altering documents . Will try & convert it to a pdf & resubmit by email again. Then they'll have had 3 copies of the same letter in different forms.

gardenia101

anna2007 wrote: »

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

Sorry Anna, I'm not sure if I'm reading your post correctly. Are you saying CM isn't included in the SLC deferment document, or it isn't included as income for deferment processes. I'm struggling with the SLC Deferment Reference document as my software doesn't like it, so I may be missing chunks of text.

I can't see CM mentioned specifically, although we have a good argument for it being excluded since it falls under non-taxable payments (sine ex has already paid tax on that money).

fermi wrote: »

Criteria for whether you are entitled to defer are set down in the loans agreements and in statute.

If you meet them you are entitled to defer.

Procedures to access that may differ, but do not override the basic legal criteria.

Sorry to nit pick on that point, but it is rather crucial.

As not set down in law, if Erudio's procedures are wrong, unfair or onerous, then they are cause for complaint and/or taking to the FOS.

That is the most important point, surely? However much Erudio want to change their procedures (& now it looks as if they may have a free hand thanks to the morons who allowed this sale), even they can't change the law.

Sarebear78

Had a call today from the FOS who are further investigating my complaint. Erudio have complied with my requests (VERY late though and only when FOS got involved!) so the only thing left is their deferral form and getting me to sign new t&cs (about CRA stuff) by forcing me to use it. We'll see whether I get anywhere but at least I have made it known what is going on and hopefully if enough people do this too it'll proceed further.

No annual statement for me but mine normally were dated Sept so I'll give them until Oct until I chase it.

DuB-RooTz

JeLaw wrote: »

DuB-RooTz, don't bother dealing with them by phone (and if you do speak to them ensure you record every call with them). Write by recorded post requesting the forms (make sure you note in the letter that you have now requested the forms repeatedly by telephone). Point out that you have not been able to apply for deferment because they have failed (despite repeated requests by you) to send you your deferment application form. There are some blank forms on this thread that you can use. Do you know your customer reference number? Include that on the deferment form. I'm guessing you might have it on their arrears letter?

Hey JeLaw, yep, i have stopped dealing with them by phone, only letters now. iv got the forms now via dropbox but im not sure of my ref as iv never had any correspondence from erudio. iv added my old SLC ref on the form instead. i was just told on the phone that i was 4 months in arrears.. !!!!!!!s!!

DuB-RooTz

StudentLoansSuck wrote: »

I wouldn’t hang about to find out. The reason why they haven’t sent you an application form could be because you have loans with other service providers. Do you have loans with either HSL or Thesis? If so give one of them a call and ask them for an application form. If one is sent out and Erudios loans are not listed on it, send back the form anyway with a covering letter that you are a shared borrower and you want your Erudio loans deferred as well.

You also want to look into the arrears. Don’t accept anything said to you over the phone, there could be more going on than you think. Lock down your deferment date. The date on the NOA could have changed for various reasons including backlog clearing. Did you even receive a NOA? Also check with your bank, do you have a direct debit set up with ESL? When did it become active? On what date does it say payments are to be collected every month? Was Erudio in a position to take money from your account but decided not to when your deferment date had passed? Has a DD been cancelled recently and who did the cancelling, you or Erudio?

These are just some of the questions you might want to ask to get a clearer picture. Sarebear78's advice also makes sense at this point.

i pretty certain i dont have split loans, SLC only advised me to deal with erudio when i called for my initial request for my def forms only to be told to deal with erudio as SLC dont deal with deferments no more..
I havent received a NOA, no statement or anything at all.. and i have never had a DD setup when with SLC..

Pluthero

ericctheking wrote: »

No other loan has deferment like this. These loans are unique.
How can the clear conflict of interest be even legal with Erudio being a profit seeking entity?
How can the say of if deferment is approved or not be down to Erudio?
Shouldn't people take the view that if they are under the threshold and have provided evidence then they are deferred. What does it matter if Erudio approve it or not? What does it matter if Erudio say you have arrears? What does it matter if you ignore their DAF?
If they want to try and get money then they can go to court. Until then why not cancel those DDs and not pay them one penny if you are under the threshold?

That's it in a nut shell!