ERUDIO student loans help

Jonez

ericctheking wrote: »

Erudio say self-employed people's income for deferment purposes is turnover not profit! Are they insane?
They also say income from rental property is the whole rent and not after expenses. Again insane!

Wouldn't that be a fairly straightforward thing to challenge? HMRC don't tax these things on turnover, and SLC never took this ridiculous view, so how do Erudio claim to be able to apply this rule? They are in effect claiming expenditure as income, how the hell does that work?

PoppyR_2

Have they ever been on Watchdog? Has anyone ever contacted Watchdog about them?

I still haven't heard from them, either in reply to my October letter, my refused DD, or my letter they received on Monday

crapola

Sorry, I am unable to post links (as a new users)and don't have time to dissect, but wanted to bring the latest FOI response to everyones attention...

fermi

Relating to what exactly?

fermi

OK.

So this request: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/student_loans_and_credit_referen

with this reply: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/224180/response/557494/attach/html/4/FOI%202014%2017916%20Mr%20K%20MacDonald%20for%20clearance%20v2.pdf.html

BaffledByErudio

fermi wrote: »

OK.

So this request: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/student_loans_and_credit_referen

with this reply: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/224180/response/557494/attach/html/4/FOI%202014%2017916%20Mr%20K%20MacDonald%20for%20clearance%20v2.pdf.html

Wow! They just won't shift, will they? Sticking to their guns whatever is asked, or whoever asks it and however they phrase it.
It's becoming obvious now that permission to report deferred loans to CRAs was the primary sweetener offered by BIS in its sale of Mortgage Style Student Loans to Erudio. How else could any buyer seriously expect to have any stick to poke legitimate deferrers with and hence potentially recoup cash that SLC had previously had little scope to because WE were sticking to the rules?
Funny how its so important to promote responsible lending when it comes to Mortgage Style loans, yet oddly not the income contingent loans when the latter often run into tens of thousands of pounds!
When the Mortgage Style loans were issued, we were assured by education officials, teachers, advisers etc, that taking them out wouldn't have negative repercussions and there was little for us to worry about unless we were to default.
But my, how things have altered! These sticking points like the ridiculous strictly enforced Direct Debit while in deferment and potential credit damage while legally deferred - well, they're not going to budge on them until something ends up in court.
Oh, and as Poppy asks earlier, I know for a fact that several people have complained to Watchdog. It has never been covered by them. Probably a lack of interest, as it's so obscure and difficult to explain how a relatively small chunk of people were royally shafted by debts 10+ years old to a viewing audience who will either not give a toss, or just think 'well these people owe money and must pay it back'!
At the end of the day, if we're under the wage threshold and have followed the rules, there should be no obligation to pay back the loans at this stage. Yet Erudio has been given the whipping stick it needs to scare people into coughing up when they're not required to!

ericctheking

Yeah and the loans were promoted to minors too!
You know what it's all a game.
If you are overseas UK courts have no jurisdiction. Tell them to get stuffed.
Same to people on the new loans.
Borrow the money then leave. Then send them postcards from the Maldives!

ericctheking

This is interesting that someone posted on another thread!
Regarding Erudio taking unauthorized direct debits.

Here it is;

I cannot comment on the particular company/business you refer to, but would advise that if they are as bad as you claim, and there are enough (undisputed) claims made against them under the terms of the Direct Debit Guarantee, their sponsoring bank may remove their sponsorship (which in simple terms means the business will no longer be permitted to use the Direct Debit Scheme which depends on 100% Payer confidence for it's continued operation)

erudioed

BaffledByErudio wrote: »

Wow! They just won't shift, will they? Sticking to their guns whatever is asked, or whoever asks it and however they phrase it.
It's becoming obvious now that permission to report deferred loans to CRAs was the primary sweetener offered by BIS in its sale of Mortgage Style Student Loans to Erudio. How else could any buyer seriously expect to have any stick to poke legitimate deferrers with and hence potentially recoup cash that SLC had previously had little scope to because WE were sticking to the rules?

I read it slightly differently actually, and i may be proven wrong, but i see it as Erudio's primary threat, with no one wanting to directly answer the question whether it is in our T&Cs or not and be brawn into saying yes or no. It certainly does suggest complicity between BIS and Erudio though because the answers from all concerned are the same. And considering it doesnt appear to be a difficult question, giving a none answer makes it look suspicious. And as such nothing changes, no one knows whether they will or will not report our loans to CRAs (well, Experian because Arrow Global have a deal with them). I wonder if they will be ready for the sheer number of complaints if they do report the loans to CRAs (and lets not forget they may have registered our loans because the experian collections network members have access to specific info normal experian customers dont) and additional office hours clogging up their system, let alone the increase in the number of people searching for and finding out online about this forum and others
Interesting, the FOI reply by BIS says SLC will not report the new student loans to CRAs unless they default etc. So will Arrow Global treat customers fairly and follow SLCs path, or will they take the bully path and destroy peoples credit files for taking out a student loan over 17 years ago, money lent to each student by ourselves as taxpayers in essence. Time will tell i guess but the threat remains hanging over us all...and its the very notion of that threat i dont like and that has put my back up!

PoppyR_2

I understand Joe Public couldn't give a toss because their reaction, rightly so, is that people should pay their debts. If Watchdog did a report on them they'd have to explain clearly exactly how these loans worked. It should also be pointed out how much money the government have potentially lost on these loans, selling them for 18p in the pound.

What annoys me more than anything is the profit Erudio will be making from those repaying. It annoys me because of how they conduct their business. After making monthly payments for 7 months, every subsequent payment I make to them will be pure profit, over 5 years I don't see them buying the loans as a risky investment at all. Their bullying tactics will, sadly, work with some and they will make a lot of money out of this.

The Government should be hanging their heads in shame and their defensive attitude shows their awareness of an embarrassing situation.

I'll keep this thread updated with my situation and any replies I receive. That's very interesting about the DD Guarantee. Does anyone know who they bank with?