ERUDIO student loans help

Pluthero

anna2007 wrote: »

According to here, there was a "GAZ1 First notification of strike-off action in London Gazette (Section 652)", 3 days ago:

http://companycheck.co.uk/company/08605918/ERUDIO-STUDENT-LOANS-LIMITED/companies-house-docs

Although the record on Companies House says the next accounts are due 30/09/15:

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk//compdetails

I think they were exempt from submitting accounts in December last year, then changed their accounting date to September, so it's the accounts due 30/09/14 that haven't been filed?

Edit: Section 652 of the Companies Act:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/6/section/652/enacted

Not surprising they can't file accounts. They can't calculate people's deferment threshold correctly!

The due diligence lunch that passed these clowns as fit and proper must have been a really expensive one!!!

anna2007

Pluthero wrote: »

Not surprising they can't file accounts. They can't calculate people's deferment threshold correctly!

The due diligence lunch that passed these clowns as fit and proper must have been a really expensive one!!!

Haha, I imagine Vince Cable was plied with booze at that lunch and was a bit worse for wear when he agreed to the sale

This latest fiasco is more than a little embarrassing for poor BIS, does make me wonder how much more evidence they need that these eejits aren't fit for purpose, before they step in and do something to sort out the shambles they've created.

It might be worth everyone emailing the FCA to highlight Erudio's latest blunder, along with a reminder of their complete incompetence over deferment applications/annual statements:

[EMAIL="consumer.queries@fca.org.uk"]consumer.queries@fca.org.uk[/EMAIL]

If Erudio lose their credit licence, they're committing a criminal offence if they continue to trade, which means hefty fines, and probably some time in prison for Mr Filer.

Jonez

Like everyone else, I love the idea of these people being bought to account by the authorities - I just can't see their friends in government allowing it happen, unfortunately. I'm sure there will be a cleverly worked compromise soon that will allow them more time to file their accounts.

anna2007

A couple of new FAQs on Erudio's website, under Recently Asked Questions':

"I don’t want to sign the deferment application form (‘DAF’) because I don’t want to provide additional consent for Erudio to perform checks at credit reference agencies – what can I do?

In response to customer feedback Erudio is working hard on a new DAF with clearer wording on this point. In the meantime we will be happy to accept signed forms with the following wording crossed out:

"ACCORDINGLY THEREFORE BY SUBMITTING THIS APPLICATION YOU CONFIRM THAT YOU CONSENT FOR ERUDIO TO PERFORM RELEVANT CHECKS AT CREDIT REFERENCE AND FRAUD PREVENTION AGENCIES."

The signature on the current DAF form was only ever intended for verification purposes and not to provide additional consent. We will only perform checks at credit reference and fraud prevention agencies as part of the process of dealing with deferment applications in line with the original loan T&Cs".

And:
"What does it mean if I have already signed and returned the form with this wording included?

We will only perform checks at credit reference and fraud prevention agencies as part of the process of dealing with deferment applications in line with the original loan T&Cs. We will not rely on the additional consent given under the current DAF".

Contradicting themselves a bit there - first they say our signature wasn't to provide additional consent, then they say they won't rely on the additional consent given under the current DAF... so which is it?!

And although it's kind of Erudio to allow us to score through the part about credit searches, they seem to have forgotten about the other part giving them the right to report our loans if they accept the deferment application...

http://www.erudiostudentloans.co.uk/faqs/default.htm

Pluthero

That's good news for people Still fighting about signing the DAF!

I think I will bring that to the attention of my FOS case worker!

:-)

Turning out to be a good day!

eroneo

Pluthero wrote: »

They did some kind of admin search on mine in may. ICO said they wanted copies of my credit report to deal with any abuse of it by Erudio!

Personally I don't think erudio will be marking any files. It's opens up a mis selling argument and I am sure Arrow Global don't want the kind of PPI scandal blowing up around them and tarnishing their good name...

You mean there was a search footprint on your file because it was searched by the ICO? But no search footprint by Erudio?

erudioed

I agree Anna, it is the reporting of the loans that irked me so. Well, the threat of it. They dont have the cojones to follow through on that threat, as thats all it ever was.
Great news in that article about Comapnies House giving them there first warning. This is the news we must spread far and wide. Nothing will hurt all the parties involved as much as this one. So why would they do such a thing? Are they aware of the scrutiny their accounts will be put under by us, especially as we will be able to get access to them. Will it illuminate on the money that has changed hands, especially the outgoings for the £160 million (if thats what it actually was...think aggregate consideration?). Maybe we will get a peek at how much they pay Ventura/Capita to carry out their sordid aims, and losses and incomings and outgoings. There sure have been quite a few key fook ups this year. Who knows, maybe they are just crap and this is further evidence of that. Either way, this is a rather amusing day thus far in a fight that has had too few!

patanne

Please let them be committing a criminal offense! I guess that is unlikely, but oh what a good dream! If they are they will be bailed out one way or another. But at least they will have p****d someone else off besides your good selves!

Pluthero

eroneo wrote: »

You mean there was a search footprint on your file because it was searched by the ICO? But no search footprint by Erudio?

No I have a complaint put into ICO about Erudio using my personal data in a way I have not consented to; ie registering my loans on CRA's. (one of the main reasons for NOT using Erudio's DAF.) ICO wanted a copy of my credit report showing any changes made should my legally deferred loans be registered as a bad debt. I signed up to NODDLE and seen Erudio had done some kind of admin check in May.

Everybody Complain about every and any thing Erudio have done to the FCA [EMAIL="consumer.queries@fca.org.uk"]consumer.queries@fca.org.uk[/EMAIL]

Lets get the heat turned up on these chancers:)

erudioed

Pluthero wrote: »

Everybody Complain about every and any thing Erudio have done to the FCA [EMAIL="consumer.queries@fca.org.uk"]consumer.queries@fca.org.uk[/EMAIL]

Lets get the heat turned up on these chancers:)

Its the only way anything will change!