ERUDIO student loans help

BaffledByErudio

So, if a number of us (and let's face it, this could be hundreds) took a joint action against Erudio, Arrow Global, CarVal and Wilmington Trust, on an argument that the government, which sold the bloody loans and now washes its hands of, how much would we need to contribute per person? Would we all need to be there? At which court would this all take place?
Would there not be some kind of pre-court/pre-action set of ground rules we could ask for? I'm not excusing the swines, but court action would be a last resort (not that I'm not up for it).
I think before we go that far, we need to address certain things. Erudio needs to start acting like a professional financial set up. I would never telephone my bank and when I ask a question I get a teenage call centre operator who stumbles over his words and acts offensive. Also, never knows what to say and, even when has access to your account, talks to you like scum.
Secondly, when you ask for something over the phone. A statement made in word, you NEVER receive it and vice versa!
You ask for a letter than confirms something. You don't get it. Then you phone them. They say you're not entitled to that 'something', then the letter arrives, confirming you are entitled. You phone again and they say the letter is wrong. It's idiotic.
What I'm saying is, how the hell does court action begin against something that can be described as nothing other than out and out confusion?

gardenia101

Student1983 wrote: »

Just in from a well deserved night out. But had a conversation earlier with erudio. The bottom line is deferral will be difficult as they don't see it as a right the same way slc did. (This we knew anyway) So for anyone who is still trying or is going to have to go through the process it will be challenging. That's why next years deferral application needs looked at now and any money that comes into your account might need to be redirected. If you do get 3rd party support you might want some of it in cash. Be sure you don't lower your income too much as they will get suspicious. If your income is below the minimum wage it will be suspicious. The threshold might lower so get your child benefit moved to your partner as Anna mentioned as this is not fair if penalised as a result of this. As for other support get your partner to pay all bills from his/her account so you don't need the money in your account to cover this. Because at the end of the day it doesn't matter as long as the bills are paid. Don't give erudio a chance to take this as your income when basically it is just a redistribution of finances which is needed to pay household bills, food etc. which could easily be sorted out by your partner although for ease of access it is given to you. If I don't get my loan cancelled my account will only show income that is rightly mine. Not shared as this will be difficult to prove. That's my theory and I reckon that is the way to go.

That could all work well for those of you that have partners - what would you suggest for us single parents who receive child maintenance & benefits because we're on such a low income anyway. I don't have the option of having another to sort my finances with - unless my ex refuses to pay CM which he is threatening to do....

Student1983 wrote: »

Did you ever get paperwork from them prior to your deferral date? If not they are at fault for not sending this. I believe they also need to send a statement as well to inform you what your instalments would be. If they didn't don't think they can take money from you. You should get more advice on this.
If it was sent and you have misplaced it that will be a different matter and they are entitled to the money bar the 3 months backdate.
Also if you had a DD in place from SLC and money was not taken when it was due you could argue that you did nothing wrong and it was their fault. Erudio automatically had my SLC transferred. I would get advice on this.
Also erudio messed up in the early months. Maybe yours is one of them.
Read through the threads to see if this is similar to others.
Phone old Student Loans. They might let you know when they sent out the letter of assignment or any other letters.

Can we prove that Erudio didn't send out all the relevant paperwork though - I've hardly received anything from them yet I can't prove that beyond providing the gazillion emails asking for that darn stuff.

I did have a letter from them yesterday saying my account was being thoroughly investigated though & I'd receive their final response within the 8 week time frame allotted by FOS - just in case I'd forgotten I'd complained :rotfl: At least this was in large print, so a minor victory.

BaffledByErudio wrote: »

So, if a number of us (and let's face it, this could be hundreds) took a joint action against Erudio, Arrow Global, CarVal and Wilmington Trust, on an argument that the government, which sold the bloody loans and now washes its hands of, how much would we need to contribute per person? Would we all need to be there? At which court would this all take place?
Would there not be some kind of pre-court/pre-action set of ground rules we could ask for? I'm not excusing the swines, but court action would be a last resort (not that I'm not up for it).
I think before we go that far, we need to address certain things. Erudio needs to start acting like a professional financial set up. I would never telephone my bank and when I ask a question I get a teenage call centre operator who stumbles over his words and acts offensive. Also, never knows what to say and, even when has access to your account, talks to you like scum.
Secondly, when you ask for something over the phone. A statement made in word, you NEVER receive it and vice versa!
You ask for a letter than confirms something. You don't get it. Then you phone them. They say you're not entitled to that 'something', then the letter arrives, confirming you are entitled. You phone again and they say the letter is wrong. It's idiotic.
What I'm saying is, how the hell does court action begin against something that can be described as nothing other than out and out confusion?

And how can we/the courts possibly believe any records that Erudio may submit as evidence? My "advice" changes on whichever employee I end up speaking to. I wouldn't be surprised if they're in the middle of tidying up all our accounts & will present us with records that show they've done everything right, the telephone call records will be edited..... or am I too cynical?

Anna - disappointing answers from the ICO so I hope the escalation of your query will actually answer those very valid points. Thanks for all the hard work you have put into this nightmare.

atomickarma

I recently wrote to Erudio to defer in letter form, but have received a letter from them today which states:

We have recently received an application for deferment from you However the form was not signed and dated. Please complete the attached form again and return it to us as soon as possible.

If you fail to return the form you monthly repayments will become due and if these repayments are not met your account will fall into arrears.

I'm aware other users have deferred via letter. So what should I do next? Would it be worth using their form but only filling in the information they actually need, or would a response via letter outlining why I haven't used their form be better?

Thanks

NJB-L73

Hi there,
Am new to the forums.
I took out a student loan in February 1998 for a degree. I had to leave the course early due to illness and sent letters every year to SLC to request deferment including my up to date contact info and income details.
I never heard anything until today when I get a letter from Erudio saying my account has been passed onto Drydensfairfax solicitors. After looking online discovered they only deal with student loans with CCJ's. Not a clue had a ccj against me. Anyway after speaking to them and explaining that I still do not work due to disability and trying to track the CCJ am still non the wiser.
Where do I stand with regards to paying it back.

:!

Brooker_Dave

NJB-L73 wrote: »

Where do I stand with regards to paying it back.

It's statute barred now surely?

erudioed

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

London Firm Was Created to Route Cash

"Greece's fiscal woes, the exposure of the European financial system to them and the role played by Wall Street in hiding the problems all converge in a fifth-floor office near London's Liverpool Street station where a company called Titlos PLC was created in early 2009.

Just 22 days after Titlos was born, the National Bank of Greece SA and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. arranged for the company to sell €5.1 billion, or about $6.96 billion, in notes, according to U.K. and U.S. documents.
Graphic

Click to see full graphic.

But Titlos wasn't a real company and the notes weren't designed for ordinary investors. Titlos doesn't make anything and its only directors are two British executives who work for a firm that specializes in the formation of corporations and the sale of pooled assets.

Instead, Titlos, descendent of a 2001 deal to help Greece hide debt, was set up to take advantage of a European Central Bank effort to inject cash into a banking market hobbled by the financial crisis. Titlos's notes were designed to be pledged for that program, according to filings by Titlos and the National Bank of Greece, and the buyer was the bank itself."

"U.K. documents show that Titlos, which filed its incorporation records on Feb. 4, 2009, is housed in a London financial district office occupied by Wilmington Trust SP Services (London) Ltd., a firm that caters to corporation formations and securitizations. Both Titlos directors work for U.S. bank Wilmington Trust. One director, who describes his occupation as a "director of special purpose companies for financing transactions," also serves as a director of nearly 200 other enterprises, the U.K. documents show."

http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703791504575079903903971986

Company Name Titlos Plc
Status Active
Category Public Limited Company
Company Number 06810180
Registered Address Wilmington Trust Sp Services (london) Limited
Third Floor
1 King's Arms Yard
London
EC2R 7AF

Company Appointments

Titlos Plc has 5 appointments, of which 4 are current and 1 have resigned.

Mr Mark Howard Filer
Type Director
Occupation Director Of Special Purpose Companies For Finance
Status Current
Appointed 4 February 2009

Address
Third Floor 1 Kings Arms Yard
London
EC2R 7AF


Current
Wilmington Trust Sp Services (london) Limited
Type Director
Nationality British

Status Current
Appointed 4 February 2009

Address
Third Floor 1 Kings Arms Yard
London
EC2R 7AF

https://www.opencompany.co.uk/company/06810180/titlos-plc

ERUDIO STUDENT LOANS LIMITED was formed on the 11th July 2013 , and are based in C/O Wilmington Trust Sp Services, Third Floor. They are currently rated NA and are considered to represent an above average risk score.

There is 1 shareholder listed for ERUDIO STUDENT LOANS LIMITED with Wilmington Trust SP Services (London) Limited owning the most amount of shares (100.00%).

Current Directors Current Company Secretary Shareholders

Wilmington Trust Sp Services (London) Limited (British)

Appointed on 11th July 2013
Mr Mark Howard Filer (British)

Appointed on 11th July 2013

It is amazing how the use of The Wilmington Trust by a variety of State level and above institutions to create shell companies that do a very questionable job has proliferated over recent times. Concerning the Greek crisis, i notice a FOI request by Bloomberg was refused about revealing the details of Titlos PLC's (headed by our beloved leader Mark Filer) role in manipulating Greece's finances pre the manufactored financial crisis that opened the door to the IMF into the major Eurozone economies and saw the UK voluntarily impose more austerity that the Mediterranean countries have thus deemed sellable to its citizens, despite the rubbish published about being kicked out of the Euro etc. Despite such dodgy things being prevelant across most european economies, no less so by Germany who fiddled their finances to make them Euro ready more than most of the other European countries, how we can sit back and consider this student loan sale legitimate and above board is for the less suspicious amongst us. Refusing key FOI info by whichever country/institution it is, seems to be a prevalent practice in covering for The Wilmington Trust's activities. You note the RBS's involvement in all this. It would be very interesting to have the whole story about why it was used, being a mainly government owned bank right now, and exactly what are BIS reasons for allowing such a disreputable company as The Wilmington Trust (Erudio) to be the target of any anger at the student loan sale...was it to deflect attention away from itself, or is it a benefit to the UK economy in the long run. Lets not forget the channel island (Guernsey) connection to all the companies involved in our student loan sale. The Wilmington trust seem to me to be the dirty, government protected institution on call to be in the front line of all the trash this deal has thrown up. Anna's FOI request about the due diligence process was refused, one can suggest, not for the reasons of it affecting the competitiveness of future loan sales, but because something highly disgraceful has taken place...and for those reasons, or in the case of the FOI request, to highlight the lack of diligence given to a (in a fairer more open financial climate that would punishable by law) company that operates on the edge of what is legal and illegal. The edge that in the coming future, if things are to become fairer and business interests are again placed beneath the citizen interests that these politicians are suppost to be representing, could judge this whole loan sale illegal, with those responsible for giving it the all clear being in a very bad predicament. Which i guess would be BIS, Osbourne and many others. It can be spun in the press how they want to, being masters of language and spin, but at the end of the day, and in the future, the facts will speak for themselves. We just need a journalist to really get down and dirty and publish something more substantial than just our front line contacts with Capita/Ventura, which in themself are a pathetically run company that train its staff to lie and manipulate those customers that are forced to contact them. Nothing about this whole deal smells nice...

as an aside, i put links to some of the above on my twatter page.

anna2007

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

It's statute barred now surely?

I thought the debt only becomes statute barred if there's no acknowledgement/correspondence in a 6 year period (5 in Scotland)?

So, ironically, if we've honoured the terms and deferred each year, we're in a far worse position than those who defaulted.

This was why I suspected that the proportion of deferred loans vs recoverable defaulted loans sold to Erudio is probably way higher than suggested in the Government's press release.

fermi

Can't technically be statute barred now, as that is a legal bar to court action being taken, if pleaded as a defence. Seems that court action has happened, so the "horse has bolted" so to speak.

Could be possible that the loans were statute barred before court action was taken. If so that might be grounds for a set-aside application, but being so late that could be difficult to get a court to consider.

However, if the CCJ is so old that it's not longer on credit files and on the registry trust website, then it may under court rules only be enforceable with fresh consent from the court, which is unlikely to be granted if no-one has bothered to try until now. So not statute barred, but could difficult in the extreme for Erduio to enforce.

Pluthero

anna2007 wrote: »

I thought the debt only becomes statute barred if there's no acknowledgement/correspondence in a 6 year period (5 in Scotland)?

So, ironically, if we've honoured the terms and deferred each year, we're in a far worse position than those who defaulted.
.

This f**ks me off the most. I was a good little citizen, did not run from my responsibilities (i know many who did and now they are better off.)

I'll set fire to my money before I hand a penny over to Erudio.

erudioed

I've just been reading Arrow Global's 2013 annual report Anna posted about and the only thing i see related to the student loan sale is £0.5million in loan notes. I dont know what it means but i know what a loan note is now...here is a definition:

DEFINITION of 'Loan Note'

An extended form of an IOU from one party to another that enables a payee to receive payments (possibly with interest) over a set period of time, ending with the date at which the entire loan is to be repaid.

Loan notes are usually provided in lieu of cash at the payee's request.
INVESTOPEDIA EXPLAINS 'Loan Note'

A loan note can help an individual investor avoid an undue tax hit resulting from a lump sum payment from a settlement or cash-out package from a company. In these cases, the individual is given a choice between cash or a loan note.

When loan notes are used between businesses, the purchaser is able to act as a borrower and make payments over time, often at a minimal or "at cost" interest rate.



If one also looks at the risks near the top and their definitions, you will see the risks associated with sharing our data, how they do it and with their use of 3rd parties (like Capita/Erudio) not treating customers fairly (or TCF as they call it). I recommend everyone has a look because it gives you much of the background, actually written down, about the practices we are being exposed to...or should i say experimented on, which is more accurate if you read it!