ERUDIO student loans help

anna2007

ymeu wrote: »

@anna2007 - that's really valuable information you managed to obtain and no doubt will be a comfort to lots of people (like me) who worry hugely about how our credit records could be affected now by something we were all told would not affect our borrowing capabilities in the future and consequently sailed into borrowings we might otherwise have thought twice about.

Another significant point made by Experian that I missed from my other post was that the loans going on my file would probably increase my credit score - quite ironic considering the threatening way Erudio have put the CRA reporting across:

I’ve found that your credit score may actually increase when your student loans are added to your report. This is because the average age of your accounts would increase – this is seen as a positive factor as it shows you have more experience managing credit. This increase would depend on the how much your loans are for because your score can go down if your outstanding balances increases. Looking at your previous report you only had a relatively small outstanding balance so your loans would need to be relatively large to reduce your score.

Of course, without seeing your most up-to-date report or exactly what information will be sent to us about your loans (for example the number of loans, start date and outstanding balances), I can’t tell you for sure how your score will be affected. I think it’s worth repeating though that the actual payment history of the accounts won’t be considered as negative.

My student loans balance is at the low end too, so it looks like the reporting would have a positive impact on my credit score. I've given Experian details of the age/balance of my loans in the followup email, and asked them to calculate the new score, based on my last Experian report in October. If others are worried about their credit score, then it might be worth trying the same - if you don't have a recent credit report/score, there's the 30 day free trial.

Experian's sample credit report shows how your outstanding total credit balance, available credit and average age of your credit accounts all affect your credit score. Under £12,500 loan/HP balance (excludes credit cards), 50% of total available credit and average age over 33 months are seen as good. The other two CRAs might have different acceptable limits/amounts, but the effect on the credit score will be the same.

http://www.experian.co.uk/consumer/sample-credit-report.html

None of this takes away from the real issues of consent and threats over the CRA reporting, but as Erudio are now saying they will report the loans (which I'm still not convinced they'll go ahead with), it makes sense to try and find out what impact it might have on our credit records.

anna2007

Lungboy wrote: »

It's telling that the FOS rep that posts in the Loans forum has never been seen in here.

Can we (or MSE) invite the FOS rep over to this thread? I'm sure it would be an 'interesting' discussion!

Pluthero

anna2007 wrote: »

I think the 'legitimate interest' condition is going to be important in all of this (certainly for credit searches, but probably pre-98 consent to reporting too), both ICO and Experian have referred to it now. It seems to be scraping the bottom of the barrel, when none of the other conditions for processing fit.

I added the following to my FOS complaint last week, when I escalated it to the ombudsman - in case anyone wants to use it in their own complaints:

"I am also unclear on what legitimate interest or justification Erudio has in reporting deferred loans to CRAs, particularly as such reporting would exclude deferred borrowers on the later agreement, as well as borrowers in repayment. It is simply not acceptable for some deferred loans to be reported to CRA's and not others: all student loans should be reported on the same basis, i.e. when the borrower defaults on repayment. What is achieved by the reporting when only certain student loans are being reported, and how is this balanced against these borrowers’ legitimate interests in the processing of their personal data, such as the right to give informed consent to disclosure, or their right to privacy? Erudio initially stated that the deferred loans would be reported to CRAs to “promote responsible lending”, although I see that they have removed reference to this on their website and in their documentation, presumably because the lending in this case was done some 15 to 25 years ago, and these Government loans were guaranteed to be granted to support students’ living expenses, provided they met the eligibility criteria. There is more information on the ‘legitimate interests’ condition here:

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/conditions-for-processing/

As confirmed by Experian, the higher the outstanding student loans balance and level of existing outstanding borrowing on a credit file, the more likely credit scores (and therefore future credit applications) will be negatively affected. I would therefore ask the ombudsman to give serious consideration to any purported legitimate interest Erudio claims to have in reporting the loans to CRAs, and to balance this against the legitimate interests of the borrowers, most of whom will experience very real, long-term adverse effects in their everyday lives, with the reporting potentially having a negative impact on life-changing credit decisions by lenders. As the legitimate interests of the individual must prevail, it would be unfair and unreasonable for student loans to be reported, particularly in the absence of any specific and informed consent.

Further, both the ICO and Experian have confirmed to me that Erudio can search my credit file without my consent, provided they have a legitimate need to do so. Erudio claim that a credit search is necessary in order to verify my income, when no income details are recorded on my credit file. Erudio also claims the credit search is necessary to confirm my identity, however this would be excessive and completely unnecessary, when identifiers such as name, address, date of birth, National Insurance number, unique loan reference number and landline telephone number are all provided on the deferment application form. I therefore do not consider Erudio to have any legitimate reason to search my credit file, as it will not enable them to verify my income and is unnecessary to confirm my identity. Even if Erudio had a legitimate interest, the ICO guidance states that when the legitimate interests are at odds, it is the legitimate interests of the individual that must come first. I have a legitimate right to privacy, and a legitimate expectation that no person accesses my personal and financial data when I have not consented to it, particularly when that access cannot be justified, and does not achieve the stated need to verify my income and confirm my identity".


Thanks, I didn't know about this - do you have a link to more info, as I'd like to put it in my email to Experian's CEO?

Excellent again Anna. You and Mrmcguffin should receive some kind of Woodward and Burnstein Award for both your endevours in getting info/attacking Erudio by picking apart their Bullsh*t Award. This omnishambles of a loan sale and the bully boy tactics of ESL are like an onion, you peel back the many layers, its smells and makes you want to cry.

Still awaiting ESL response to my credit search and CRA reporting complaints and will hit them with the argument you just quoted. Mind you its probably busy at £rudio towers with them sending out thousands of new DAFS.......

anna2007

Pluthero wrote: »

Good point. Why are the FOS washing their hands of this mess? They do have some powers and liaise closely with the FCA afterall?

Having goolged about the FOS it seems they can be pretty facking hopeless in a lot of cases if you don't present your complaints clearly/ and they are just genuinely not very good at THEIR purpose? But still even for them the handling and outcome of £rudio complaints thus far have been pi*s poor.

All ombudsmen are members of the Ombudsman Association, who state that the principal features of an ombudsman scheme include:

Ombudsman scheme recommendations/decisions are based on what is fair in the circumstances, taking account of good practice as well as law

For FOS to say they won't consider the legal aspect of a complaint is just boll0cks - a total cop out and a major failing in the their legal duty to properly consider complaints.

http://www.ombudsmanassociation.org/about-principle-features-of-an-ombudsman-scheme.php

Brooker_Dave

Pluthero wrote: »

Mind you its probably busy at £rudio towers with them sending out thousands of new DAFS.......

Mr Filer must be a busy man given he is their only employee...

heartbroken

The exact wording of my response from FOS on that point:

"...I do not think that the financial ombudsman service is the appropriate forum to test any legal claim that Erudio are obliged to accept deferments without completion of its forms. It is not our role to provide legal opinions or rulings on technical points of law. A judgement on this issue would be better suited to a court…"

BorderReiver14

On one level this is the best statement yet to come from the fos as it is showing us how ineffectual such independent services are. The courts are the only way forward. The fos recently told me for example that the legislation may not spell out that we have to use a daf but it does not say we shouldn't either and as such they feel the ambiguity is something that leaves them the only option of commenting on what is 'right and reasonable' i.e ...use a daf!

Jonez

I can't help but wonder how much of this stuff could have been put to bed if the details and outcome of the case brought by Anthony Reeves could have been made public.

cluelessfish

BorderReiver14 wrote: »

On one level this is the best statement yet to come from the fos as it is showing us how ineffectual such independent services are. The courts are the only way forward. The fos recently told me for example that the legislation may not spell out that we have to use a daf but it does not say we shouldn't either and as such they feel the ambiguity is something that leaves them the only option of commenting on what is 'right and reasonable' i.e ...use a daf!

It is not the use of "a daf" that is the problem it is the contents of erudios daf fos should be ruling on.

Did we not all use the slc daf for many years without problem?

BorderReiver14

I think many people were hoping for both. As stated earlier in numerous posts the 98 regulations do not say we have to use a daf. The fos have said to heartbroken that they do not consider themselves an appropriate service to test this point... But yes, it would be nice for the fos to also consider the content of the previous daf, especially in view of ESL now revising it and bringing out a new one.... And the reason many have decided not to use a daf is down to the content so does the fos not consider we have a right to use a bespoke letter with the same evidence we would provide anyway? (Payslips etc)