ERUDIO student loans help

dizzybuff

I tend to phone them. I havnt tried the standing order info they gaVe me
Going to phone them.soon as I'm waiting on compo. Once I've got This I'll be doing a foi to male sure they have scrapped my bank.details.

evilsheep

Hi again. Haven't had time to read through all posts since my last message, but, in a nutshell, I received a letter rom Erudio in the last week along with a promise that a compensation cheque for £25 would follow! They're still insisting that I fill out their DAF though.

I'll scan the letter tomorrow and give full details then. The plot thickens ...

basictonal

ok i emailed erudio about deferring when the threshold changes in sept 2015. i will have to pay until then as i am over the current threshold.

however they are saying i need to provide THREE months previous payslips and not just ONE, is that correct?:

"Regarding the repayment, if the threshold changes and as long as you can prove that your earnings (for the last 3 months) are below it, you are eligible to defer"

i thought that it was only one i need to provide?

thanks
david

fermi

You've simply got to show that for the 3 months following the relevant one, that your income is unlikely to be above the threshold.

There is no set definition of what evidence is sufficient to show that, but 3 months worth of previous payslips could be one way of doing it.

However, if you circumstances have changed and those 3 months do not match what you will be earning in the NEXT 3, then they should accept alternate evidence showing what you are likely to earn from now on.

thin_king

Just a quick heads up people – I emailed Erudio regarding not receiving my DAF as I have reached the 8 week prior to end of current deferment date 19/05/2015. I was then told to my surprise that my deferment actually ends on the 19/06/15 – this cannot be right as it has always been in May, so I am concerned they are trying to pull a fast one by wrongly informing people of the end of their deferment so they go into default.

It looks like I will be over the threshold this year so not really an issue for me (as I’ll be paying back) but just thought I’d warn you lot of more apparent dodgy admin!

anna2007

basictonal wrote: »

ok i emailed erudio about deferring when the threshold changes in sept 2015. i will have to pay until then as i am over the current threshold.

however they are saying i need to provide THREE months previous payslips and not just ONE, is that correct?:

"Regarding the repayment, if the threshold changes and as long as you can prove that your earnings (for the last 3 months) are below it, you are eligible to defer"

i thought that it was only one i need to provide?

thanks
david

As soon as the new threshold comes into effect on 1 September, you can apply for deferment and use your 3 payslips for June to August as evidence (which should all be below the new threshold)?

I think I mentioned in an earlier post waiting until October to apply, but if your income in August is under the new threshold, then August would be the relevant month.

The new threshold is announced around mid-August, so you could even apply then, with July being the relevant month, plus your 2 payslips for May and June. By the time Erudio faff about with your application, the new deferment threshold will be in place. I don't think the regulations prevent this (although Erudio will try to no doubt!).

The wording from the regulations:

9. Each year the lender will tell the borrower the new deferment level for the period between 1st September and the following 31st August. The borrower can defer making repayments of the loan if—

(a)the lender has not already asked him to repay the loan in full, and

(b)he can show—

(i)that his gross income for the relevant month is not more than the deferment level, and

(ii)if the lender asks, that his gross average monthly income during the 3 months immediately following the relevant month will not or is unlikely to be more than the deferment level.

Former_MSE_Paloma

Erudio admits it's sent out more letters quoting incorrect regulations and it has apologised over deferment form delays ...

Read the full story:

Erudio admits sending letters to graduates quoting outdated regulations




Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

anna2007

From the latest article:

An Erudio spokesman says: "We are aware that a small number of customers have in the past received a letter from Erudio stating that The Education (Student Loan) Regulations 1997 apply to their loans. This is not the case, and we apologise for this typographical error.

If it was a typo, how did they manage to quote sections of the 1997 regs that aren't in the 1998 regs?!

fermi

- Mostly as far as I saw the misquoting was done in response to complaints, seemly in order misrepresent what the law says.

- The main issue was not the wrong threshold quoted, but the use of the 1997 Regulations' wording regards what other conditions students had to meet to defer.

- Erudio misquoted the 1997 regulation to students and the FOS relying on the section that said:

"shall be entitled to defer making repayments of that loan if he satisfies the loans administrator"

- The correct 1998 Regulation do not require that students "satisfy" Erudio of anything. Instead it is just:

"he can show"

- Erudio used erroneously the "satisfy" term to justify the use of their DAF forms and their unlawful refusal of deferments that did not use them.

- i.e That they would not be "satisfied" unless their forms were used and signed.

- Possibly a false contention, but one they hoped students and the FOS would fall for.

- The correct "he can show" makes it clearer that that insistence is false, as the student just has to show this via any reasonable means they choose, and is not required to satisfy Erudio of anything, or use their forms. It is a legal right to defer, not a favour Erudio are doing people.

fermi

Then again, I can understand a little why MSE are not prepared to go the mile on the legality of the forms, but it is a shame and an opportunity missed.