ERUDIO student loans help

fermi

AReeves wrote: »

Here, the arguments in my opinion are rather different in that we are not trying to take advantage of not being able to locate an old document but simply want them to perform their side of a contract and grant a deferment where the applicant has shown they are entitled to deferment.

I was thinking more on the unfair relationships on s16 side rather than the strict entitlement = deferment part, DAF or no DAF.

The latter may be more straight forward, at least for some of the loans, although may be potential hiccup on that for the pre-1998 ones.

Carey and McGuffick are extreme examples I agree.

fermi

Don't get me wrong, I would be very pleased if you are right.

EDIT: Or more precisely, if the judge you get on they day does.

fermi

Oh, one thing I meant to ask.

Do people think it worth starting a new thread on this? Clearly linking back to this one of course.

This one is getting "unwieldy" if that is a way of putting it. Some new people directed here seems to be being put off by the sheer length and amount of info.

Obviously any new thread would probably have to have a few summary posts at the beginning with a good explanation of the issues and where we have got to so far, and how we got there etc.

Would also have to check with MSE as some of the site articles point to this thread as a discussion thread for them, so that would have to be OKd and sorted.

Just a thought. May or may not happen even if people say yes, but I at least need to ask to see what you think.

anna2007

fermi wrote: »

Oh, one thing I meant to ask.

Do people think it worth starting a new thread on this? Clearly linking back to this one of course.

This one is getting "unwieldy" if that is a way of putting it. Some new people directed here seems to be being put off by the sheer length and amount of info.

Obviously any new thread would probably have to have a few summary posts at the beginning with a good explanation of the issues and where we have got to so far, and how we got there etc.

Would also have to check with MSE as some of the site articles point to this thread as a discussion thread for them, so that would have to be OKd and sorted.

Just a thought. May or may not happen even if people say yes, but I at least need to ask to see what you think.

I agree it must be off-putting to new members having to face 3000+ posts :eek:

I've no objection to a new thread, but it would eventually turn into the monster we've created here, and pertinent info will just get lost again. I've seen a thread where the first 30 or so post spaces were 'reserved' (by agreement with the powers that be at MSE), so that template letters, etc are all there at the start of the thread, that might work?

I'm not sure how stickied threads work, but is that another option? So all the useful stuff goes there, and we continue to rant and become unwieldy right here

Another thing that might help, either on a new or stickied thread, is to make people aware of the "Search this thread" button above. I've been an MSE member for nearly two years, and really only noticed/started using it in the last few months If people have any other tips on how to find info on the forum, that could be added too.

gardenia101

anna2007 wrote: »

I agree it must be off-putting to new members having to face 3000+ posts :eek:

I've no objection to a new thread, but it would eventually turn into the monster we've created here, and pertinent info will just get lost again. I've seen a thread where the first 30 or so post spaces were 'reserved' (by agreement with the powers that be at MSE), so that template letters, etc are all there at the start of the thread, that might work?

I'm not sure how stickied threads work, but is that another option? So all the useful stuff goes there, and we continue to rant and become unwieldy right here

Another thing that might help, either on a new or stickied thread, is to make people aware of the "Search this thread" button above. I've been an MSE member for nearly two years, and really only noticed/started using it in the last few months If people have any other tips on how to find info on the forum, that could be added too.

Fermi - I agree with all that Anna has said about a new thread, especially having the main posts on the first page if possible. I struggle using the search facility (I know what I want to find is there somewhere, but I often can't find it :rotfl: so an idiots guide linky would be helpful. Although in my defence I can use search facilities on other forums, so I'm not entirely thick Just seems to be MSE search facility I can't get on with).

Anna - have PM'd you.

Namechanger

Pluthero wrote: »

For a quiet life I would fill in the form with the same info you gave SLC in the past. Cross out all the FPN and CRA threats And send a cover letter saying you are in no way accepting any new conditions!! Use recorded mail!! And email them too as back up!

You do not need to set up a DD if you are in deferment and Anna on here has that in writing from erudio!!

HTH

Did all this and got a letter back this morning to say I am successfully deferred. Wow, unexpected.

RoaringTwenties

anna2007 wrote: »

That's pretty much it - Erudio making deferment conditional on using their DAF, when the regulations only require the borrower to "show" the lender that their income's below the threshold, there's no prescribed format on how that should be done. Also, the unfair relationship created over consent to the credit reporting. If you have a look through Anthony's (AReeves) posts, that will give a good picture of what's happening re court action.


I think the level of income probably does have a bearing, it makes sense for them to focus the worst of their attention on those closer to the threshold, at least for now. My income's low (my loan balance is relatively low too) and my deferment was fairly quick and painless... they probably wish I would just go away now, it'll most likely cost them more in FOS and court costs than they'll ever get back on my loans


SLC asked me for further evidence of financial support when I applied for deferment after giving up work (I initially gave them proof of Child Benefit and CTC), so you can be sure Erudio will want the same, with bells on! I worked out half of the household outgoings we're jointly liable for, and declared that.

If you have a look at page 14 of the DAF guide, it says to add together all the values declared at sections 4 to 8, so anything in section 8 will be included by Erudio (even the disability-related benefits which should be disregarded).


There have been some reports on here of Erudio using the rental figure (before allowable expenses and 100% of it, even where the property's jointly owned) as the amount of income. They have been doing the same with self-employed earnings. The evidence Erudio asks for in the DAF guide is a letter from the tenant confirming the rent figure, or bank statements showing the rent payment being received - nothing to show what the actual income is, after allowable expenses.


DON'T DO IT!! Erudio are hopeless on the phone and it's better to have everything in writing, in case you need to make a complaint regarding your deferment at a later date. I found customerservice@erudiostudentloans.co.uk better for getting a response, than the Deferments email given in the DAF guide. Put your address and DOB at the end of every email, or they'll just contact you a few weeks later, asking you to confirm your identity!


They don't need to know this - there's no legal basis for Erudio to have this info. I think some have only provided the details previously provided to SLC. They certainly can't refuse to defer you if you mark the homeowner question as "not applicable".

HTH

Anna thanks so much for responding in detail once more (& apologies MSE if my re-quoting has taken up too much space!)

I have no experience in this but I think if it's possible to make this into a sticky, or have certain explanatory posts at the start of an ongoing thread or a regular precis of developments or something that would be incredibly useful - I very much want to be on board in terms of understanding what's going on & also offering info & assistance to others but it is quite a lot to take in on a long thread like this when you're trying to get to the bare bones of the situation! I appreciate people need to converse & that this is a constantly moving situation with lots of people's experiences though, so perhaps not that easy...

I can see from reading that it's the way Erudio calculate the info we provide that seems to be the issue in terms of achieving deferment. I suspect that however I present it they will add it all up together in an attempt to get it as near the threshold as possible. Did I read somewhere that people had blanked out sections of their bank statements that were no business of Erudio's? There are payments on our joint account made to my sole named account that are savings for the kids birthdays etc, but I can just see Erudio spinning that to be "monies made available" to me :mad:

If I've understood recent developments from Financial Ombudsman complaints, they are basically saying that Erudio shouldn't be giving info to CRAs but that they can't actually stop them, & that SLC had the power to do that all along they just elected not to? And that the DAF is fine despite it not being a condition of the original loan, which is basically to self-cert on our income? I can see discussion too about Erudio saying the new DAF won't have the bit about consent to CRAs on it, I'm sure that discussion goes back months & my DAF which arrived last week clearly has it on :mad:

Thanks again to all who are giving their time to investigate this & provide experience & advice

Pluthero

Namechanger wrote: »

Did all this and got a letter back this morning to say I am successfully deferred. Wow, unexpected.

Good stuff! Erudio have definitely been told to stop messing people about:-)

Sarebear78

Did I read somewhere that people had blanked out sections of their bank statements that were no business of Erudio's? There are payments on our joint account made to my sole named account that are savings for the kids birthdays etc, but I can just see Erudio spinning that to be "monies made available" to me :mad:

I blacked out any transactions from our joint account that were my husbands as he did not want to disclose them to Erudio. He wrote on the statements that he gave no permission for me to share these and that the items blacked out where his expenditure.

It was fine and I got deferred doing this. Hope that helps.


On an unrelated point - has anyone who was given compensation from the FOS actually received their money from Erudio? It has been nearly 2 months since I accepted £100 from them and no money received. Have sent two emails to the FOS and she is chasing them. Does anyone know what happens if they don't comply with the FOS decision? I will keep complaining, if just to make it more difficult for them!

I am looking forward to this years deferral too (strangely) and do hope they DON'T defer me when I provide all the details the same as last year, just so I can complain again!

RoaringTwenties

Sarebear78 wrote: »

I blacked out any transactions from our joint account that were my husbands as he did not want to disclose them to Erudio. He wrote on the statements that he gave no permission for me to share these and that the items blacked out where his expenditure.

It was fine and I got deferred doing this. Hope that helps.

Thank you Sarebear78, that's really helpful. We were discussing this earlier, as far as I can see they have no right to ask for information from a partner in any case...

Appreciate your post