ERUDIO student loans help

plong979

BorderReiver14 wrote: »

Hi plong979
Was it the ombudsman or an adjudicator? Did they cite any reason why you should use the DAF ie legislation, or just that they thought it was "fair and reasonable"?
Good for you though... Keep up the fight!

It was just the adjudicator so i can still go onto the next stage.

I'll just type the end of the letter about the DAF below

Regarding your concerns as to the completion of the DAF, I would advise that if the completion of this is required by the business in order to defer the loan then you will need to do so. We are unable to tell the business what procedures it should have in place or it should defer the loan without it.

I do not consider the form to onerous and whilst you say it asks you to provide information that is not required, in its letter of 1 July 2014, Erudio confirmed what sections you need to complete and these relate to income details.

Yeah payslips and an employment letter along with a declaration obviously doesn't give them enough details about income.

They want my signature and they ain't getting it.

rizla_king

FOS_moron wrote:

I would advise that if the completion of this is required by the business in order to defer the loan then you will need to do so.

It's NOT required though.

So if Erudio required you to sacrifice you firstborn in oerder to defer, the FOS would say you had to do it because the firm requires it. :rotfl:

Absolute moronic nonsense. :mad:

gardenia101

BorderReiver14 wrote: »

I would complain about this and keep a record/trail to show your good intentions. As long as you can show you are making a good effort with them then they really are just setting themselves up to look bad should you ever need to take further action against them.
Congratulations on getting your extended deferment though.

Sick of complaining although I guess the gazillion letters to ESL have finally made them listen about the large print for some documents - although 3 complaint letters later & getting FOS involved STILL haven't made them able to send me most of the missing correspondence like statements....

So fed up with it all - I think this thread will still be going in 2017 when I need to defer again

Sorry - been a loooong week

erudioed

If you all want a laugh and some light relief amongst all this scumbaggery, check out this link to a letter sent out by Capita for Erudio...click on each of the 4 squares to reveal a class A **ck-up: https://twitter.com/tinygert/status/566315741579067393/photo/1

spacemanc

fermi wrote: »

Searches are done separately on each CRA, so they can choose which ones to search. A company can remove a search if it was carried out in error.

As these aren't credit application searches, only you see them.

I think it depends on the CRA that they use and how they Erudio decide to classify the search.

On Equifax, if it's a debt collection search it appears on Table 1 alongside credit application searches and is therefore visible to other lenders. Credit application searches stay on your report for one year, but debt collection searches stay on for two years and are labelled as "Debt Collection".

fermi

That's a long standing issue with Equifax and those searches. They shouldn't allow them to appear like that, but some screwball reason they do on occasion. If you query it you get answers that straight out contradict themselves.

Anyway, Erudio should not be doing that particular type of search here for normal deferment, and the type they can or might should not show. Confirmed that with Equifax and the ICO a long time ago (although not in ref to Erudio - was well before). Will try to dig it out if I still have it.

RubyRue

erudioed wrote: »

If you all want a laugh and some light relief amongst all this scumbaggery, check out this link to a letter sent out by Capita for Erudio...click on each of the 4 squares to reveal a class A **ck-up: https://twitter.com/tinygert/status/566315741579067393/photo/1

That is exactly what my letter is like.

spacemanc

fermi wrote: »

That's a long standing issue with Equifax and those searches. They shouldn't allow them to appear like that, but some screwball reason they do on occasion. If you query it you get answers that straight out contradict themselves.

Anyway, Erudio should not be doing that particular type of search here for normal deferment, and the type they can or might should not show. Confirmed that with Equifax and the ICO a long time ago (although not in ref to Erudio - was well before). Will try to dig it out if I still have it.

If you could dig that out it would be appreciated. I only mentioned it as I'm currently in a dispute with a water company, who used a table 1 search against me less than a month after received the bill. They refuse to remove it and keep saying that if I go on DD payments, it wont happen again - which is of course why they're doing it in the first place.

Forever

I have just received the final decision from the Ombudsman. They have:

- agreed Erudio's customer service was lacking
- agreed Erudio took too long to deal with my deferment
- do not agree that Erudio's processes results in bullying and harassment
- do not agree that they shouldn't mark our credit files (I have a pre-1998 contract)
- says it cannot do anything about Erudio's processes in regards to it being cumbersome, intrusive, and the expenses involved in order to defer.
- the Ombudsman has said that Erudio should compensate me a bit more than the adjudicator did (I was warned that I could receive less when I asked for my case to be reviewed by an actual Ombudsman - so I'm glad it went this way).

I don't think I am going to get any further with the FOS, so I think I am going to accept it (reluctantly). I only hope that Erudio paying out means it will try to improve its business processes anyway. There's nothing like dreaming... :rotfl:

So I am now laying all my hopes on other people complaining more effectively than I to the FOS, complaining to other appropriate bodies, and on AReeves when he goes to court - Go AReeves!

BorderReiver14

Thanks for posting this Forever and I'm sorry the FOS have not been more kind to you... and its not great news for the rest of us waiting on FOS decisions.

Starting to see a pattern here and as others have commented it seems legal action is the only way we are going to bring ESL to heal.