ERUDIO student loans help

Pluthero

That all sounds very familiar erudioed!

:@

BaffledByErudio

That all sounds like a carbon copy of what we're seeing now @erudioed.
It's an absolute disgrace. I was told, when I was a sixth former, at the age of 17. That's SEVENTEEN, that it was a wise choice to take out a student loan, because grants were being phased out. And that I shouldn't worry, because it was a debt I would probably never have to repay - unless I earned the big bucks!
Admittedly, I'm deferred now and technically, nothing is any different, other than it's now an in-my-face, constant bank balance checking scenario thanks to Erudio, their insistence on a Direct Debit mandate, and their track record.
I'm disgusted by it and can't believe we're all none the wiser. I've written to my MP. I've complained to the FOS, I've complained to BIS. I've even written to and have a reply from Vince Cable!
Yet it's a brick wall. I will never trust a word a politician says again. The fact that CRAs are suddenly thrust upon us a threat stinks to high heaven. Especially when Arrow bought this bloody debt for peanuts.
Read this bit from their website. Admittedly, it's for those in arrears, but they are fierce bloody words! All that gubbins about 'it might stop you getting a phone'. Obviously purely designed to scare the bejeezus out of folk. Hideous barstewards!

"This means that there has been a shortfall in one or more payments due from you on your Erudio Student Loans account. If your account is in arrears, we would encourage you to make a payment to bring your account back up to date as soon as you can. This is important because information about outstanding arrears may be registered with Credit Reference Agencies (CRAs) and your account may be recorded as in default. This may affect your ability to obtain credit for things such as a home loan or even a mobile phone, both now and in the future."

Pluthero

Why do you have a DD in place if you are deferred? You only have to have one set up if you are repaying. Thought that was all made clear or are they still insisting on it? I would cancel it for peace of mind instead of worrying about them ROBBING you: YES ROBBING is what it would be. They have never brought that issue up with me? Mind you I'm still fighting using their DAF. But here is how I see it panning out:

*I supplied enough info to defer under the original agreement/am under the threshold/sent recorded delivery to Erudio.
*Playing Letter Tennis with them ATM over their NON compliance with original loan terms.
*They will keep sending threats/arrears/AND LETTERS NOT DEALING WITH MY COMPLIANTS
*They may/may not take me to court/trash my credit rating/
*They will keep sending threats/arrears/BUT NO LETTERS DEALING WITH MY ACTUAL COMPLAINTS ABOUT THEIR DAF:)
*Then I will GO to court and win as I am in the right.

If you are under the threshold and have supplied Erudio same evidence the SLC accepted in the past DO NOT PAY ERUDIO A PENNY. All the rest is smoke and mirrors.

And after reading about the whole Honours Student Loan sell off it is even more of a disgrace that the GOVT went ahead and did the exact same thing with Erudio. :mad:

erudioed

There's a new wave of FOI request from a heroic individual just added to the list...thats over 43 now, with most due for an answer in the coming month:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/search/Erudio/all

JeLaw

Just catching up on the posts I've missed over the past few days. Really shocking to read about the Honours situation - and that having that information the government still went ahead and sold our loans to Erudio.

Update on my own situation. I have now been deferred. I'm very, very grateful to all the people on here for their advice on deferment and especially those who posted particular information such as Anna2007's letter from them to her confirming that having a DD set-up was NOT a requirement for deferment.

Still can't help worrying that this isn't the end! I've photocopied their confirmation letter just to make sure I have a back-up copy. And then there's next year to go through it all again...

I wish you luck, Pluthero. I admire your courage in fighting them all the way.

erudioed

Congrats and dont forget to lodge complaints with Erudio first and then the ombudsman if you are unhappy because if we dont go through that process (even though it is a time consuming pain in the neck) no one outside of Erudio will every hear about our situation and the Erudio crew will keep trying more and more tricks to see how many of us they can trick.

Pluthero

Jelaw I am not that brave JUST really pi**ed at them. Hopefully have some resolution shortly.

Could I ask everyone to send a complaint to the FCA, just email them. Amend the complaint you have sent to the FOS which is what I did as the FCA don't deal with individual complaints. Let them hear your tale of woe about Erudio. So they clock up another complaint and maybe do something about these chancers.

erudioed

I also understand the FCA is the only authority that has the power to make suggestions about procedural changes (please say if that is incorrect if i am wrong), so is a great suggestion Pluthero. For example, if anyone would prefer Erudio to say a deadline for the return of the deferment form before which they will not collect a DD payment, or highlight the DD issue of not sending out this forewarning about taking the 1st DD payment as mandated by the DD collection rules, or this incessant lying by the Capita call centre, then its my understanding the FCA is the place to go. I know there are other issues as well along such lines, such as not having to have a DD in place during deferment, no seemingly uniform rules about certain issues because Erudio say one thing & state another but dont change their website FAQs, and the issue of not changing their recent deferment forms even though they have admitted some parts are misleading and unnecessary that would all make good complaints. Let alone the issue of no one really fully understanding what the hell we have actually signed away on this 1st deferment form because it is misleading, unclear and with threatening overtones, these would all be good FCA complaints if we were to get anything procedurally changed to make deferring relatively painless during the coming years. If we dont try and put a stop to such things, or we want things to be much more straightforward, i imagine it will become increasingly difficult as the years pass to get changes, so we have to go forward with such things whilst the embers are still burning!

anna2007

Received my annual statement from Erudio this morning and it's great to see them stay true to form, as they can't get that right either :mad:

They've reduced the interest, saying that they wrote in June, detailing an incorrect balance, as it didn't include interest up to the date of the letter, so there's no interest been charged from 16 June to 31 August.

I've checked all correspondence, and my deferment letter dated 16 June does show the balance at 28 Feb. But it does feel like they're being devious and setting up a future trap, given that the loan agreement and legislation require a specific amount of APR to be charged on the outstanding balance.

I may be reading too much into it (and I do have trust issues with Erudio, ha!), but it's just a heads up to others to look out for it. Also, we need to keep our annual statements safe, maybe scan a copy too, in case they decide to drag these things up in future years.

They've included some FAQ's too, one of which says:
"Can I defer repaying my loan?

You can apply to defer repaying your loan unless we have notified you that your loan is repayable in full or the term of your loan has expired".

I thought the wording here is a bit strange - do they mean the loans qualify for cancellation (in which case you obviously don't need to apply to defer), or something more ominous?

anna2007

erudioed wrote: »

There's a new wave of FOI request from a heroic individual just added to the list...thats over 43 now, with most due for an answer in the coming month:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/search/Erudio/all

Wow, he's really going for it!

I doubt if he'll receive the info for most of them though, I think multiple requests from the same person in a 60 day period can be added together by the authority when applying the cost limit and can be refused on that basis