ERUDIO student loans help

globetrotter123

I have asked erudio to provide true copies of my agreement and after several request, they provided illegible copies. I asked for legible copies and they are now saying that they are not obliged to provide copies that include a signature, quoting a case of Carey Vs HSBC bank.....is this the case or are they trying it on again?! I was going to pay off my arrears but each time they reply I just feel like they are dishonest and even if I pay, they will find a way to either not defer me again or something....still annoyed

fermi

If they are providing copy agreements under s77 on the Consumer Credit Act 1974, then yes they cannot omit the signature from any copy.

Are the agreements illegible in any other way?

ericctheking

globetrotter123 wrote: »

I have asked erudio to provide true copies of my agreement and after several request, they provided illegible copies. I asked for legible copies and they are now saying that they are not obliged to provide copies that include a signature, quoting a case of Carey Vs HSBC bank.....is this the case or are they trying it on again?! I was going to pay off my arrears but each time they reply I just feel like they are dishonest and even if I pay, they will find a way to either not defer me again or something....still annoyed

For your request then I think they are right as reconstituted documents are fine for the request. This is the gist on the Carvey Vs HSBC case.
If they take you to court they need the original documents or certified copies with your signature on it. The burden of proof is on them to prove a debt actually exists, If they don't have it then they can not enforce the agreement!

fermi

Sort of. If you have a valid reason to think that you did not sign an agreement, then the burden of proof in court may well be on them to show on that balance of probability one was signed.

127 (3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a) (signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

Unfortunately, the 'balance of probability' test in civil proceedings does not always mean they have to rock up to court with a genuine copy. If they can convince a court that the agreements and procedures in place were such that a loan would not have been granted without the signed agreement being in place, so that is is likely one was signed, then a judge may well side with them even if they cannot produce an actual copy.

Banks and other creditors frequently struggle to produce convincing arguments on what was signed, as they issued faulty agreements, that changed frequently, and did not keep good records on what they looked like and contained.

In contrast SLC had basically 2 stock agreements, and only one issued at any time period on particular years, and the form and content of those is very well known. So much of the uncertainly that comes into play with other types of credit agreement would be absent with the SLC ones.

crystalflower2014

I have ALWAYS deferred my student loan every March. As most of you know, Erudio administration have been totally incompetent and unprofessional in their communication, dealing with 'graduate' students.
I have received arrears letters??? from them and I am now in proceedings with the Financial Ombudsman to hopefully help me out of this depressing, stressful situation I have found myself.
I have never been or ever will have the pleasure of earning over the threshold to start paying the loan off and I believe Erudio have put these arrears on for some reason to get some money back.

I feel at a total loss as to why?! when I was informed my student loan had been deferred by both The SLC and Erudio.

erudioed

Ive been off on a public awareness campaign about the next student loan sale, to some success i may add, but i was pointed in the direction of this:
Summary of the Sale of Student Loans Act 2008

The Bill contains measures to enable a programme of sales of the Government's Student Loans Portfolio.
The sale of the student loan book is part of an ongoing Government strategy to transfer ownership of all public assets that are not essential to the Government's public service delivery objectives.
The student loan book is worth around £18.1 billion and is expected to increase in value to £55 billion over the next ten years. The Government expects the proposed sales programme to realise around £6 billion in receipts by the end of financial year 2010/11.
Key areas

• Transactions will only proceed if they represent good value for money and include a genuine transfer of risk to the private sector
• Terms and conditions for individual borrowers will stay the same, the Government intends
• Government will retain control of all loan arrangements and regulations, including interest rates and repayment thresholds
• Student Loans Company will continue to administer all accounts. Purchasers would only be allowed to use data about borrowers for the specific purpose of managing the loans.

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2007-08/saleofstudentloans.html


Im sure (i have forgotten if yes or no) many will have covered this before, but i thought i would post it again because it certainly highlights initial thinking on keeping things pretty much under a tight reign by the government. Maybe it has been superseded by another Act?

gardenia101

gardenia101 wrote: »

[FONT=&quot]I had the reply below from Noddle when I queried how having deferred loans reported by Erudio may work. Not sure what to make of their reply but here it is -
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I can confirm that Erudio aren’t supplying your student loan information to us now, however I have no way of saying whether they will begin to do this in the future. Similarly, I don’t know how they will choose to report on deferred payments – if Erudio have told you they will do this, then it’s most likely to be the case.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]When you say that you understand payment holidays as [/FONT][FONT=&quot]breaks in repayments and they do not suggest to others viewing my file that the loans do not have to repaid, you are correct. Any lender viewing your file, if it does show ‘payment holiday’ in the future, will know what this means.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I’m really sorry I can’t give you a more definite answer, however until the information is on your credit file it’s not possible for me to know how it will be displayed.

[FONT=&quot]Sorry, brain not functioning today. Will reread their reply & the last pages of this thread & try harder[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][/FONT]
[/FONT]

Noddle have replied to my further email asking for clarification about this wooly response - this time they haven't even answered my email, just said;

Thanks for your email and apologies for the length of time it’s taken us to get back to you. We’re experiencing extremely high volumes of emails at the moment so rather than you having to wait any longer for a response, we thought it best to send out a general email which highlights how great our FAQs are.

Our Help section highlights our top 10 questions and answers, while the FAQs are much more detailed and may answer your specific query. You can find them here –

Help - https://www.noddle.co.uk/help
FAQs – https://www.noddle.co.uk/f-a-q

We’re really sorry for not answering your query personally but we hope the FAQs give you the answer you were looking for and save you further time waiting for us to get back to you.

Of course, if you do have a complicated query which you need help with then please email [EMAIL="contact@noddle.co.uk"]contact@noddle.co.uk[/EMAIL] to ask for further help. Please don’t reply to this email as this inbox isn’t monitored.


So not much clarification there then :rotfl:


Nothing has shown up on my latest Noddle report though, which is good news.

fermi wrote: »

Those both seem like reasonable requests and complaints to hold open, even short of any legal requirement, which I'm sure they have.

My adviser has agreed to keep my case open until I receive large print paperwork (Honestly, how f'in difficult is it to enlarge something these days :wall:). She'll get in touch with Erudio & investigate further....

She has been pretty good so far; I'm very frustrated with the whole process & how long it all takes, & how FOS can't hold Erudio to account & get them to do their job properly (aren't we all ), but my adviser has been nothing but fair & helpful. She can also do large print & email quite easily...

Mr_McGuffin

Next loan sale:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/416836/A_Odgers_published_appointment_letter_March_2015.pdf

erudioed

Thanks for that Mr McGuffin.
I probably saw this before as well, but just came across it again, its an old interview David Willetts on the BBC assuring us our particular loan sale would be fine and we would have nothing to worry about:
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-25084744

Interestingly, for the new loan sale, and although it is fundamentally different in many regards as i have had pointed out to me, there is an actual inclusion that terms can be changed at any given time, and indeed, the bit from the recent budget includes a part that says terms will be fixed prior to the loan sale. There have been a few people, including Martin Lewis, writing about it in the past, but there is a general worry that the money those students will be paying back will be increased to make the sale more appealing. In one regard we had the protection of T&Cs not being changed (i know thats being tested to its limits with us) but for the new lot, they have no such protection.
Also, interestingly, my experience on twatter is that teachers and their unions are generally outraged, with many not knowing about it, or indeed our sale. As soon as one tweet reached one person's contacts, retweets were flying around to people with hundreds, and in some case, many thousands of followers accounts. However, the NUS have chosen to neither comment or acknowledge anything i have sent, and in fact, although they are not from the NUS, one twatter group claiming to collect NUS stories, actually got into an argument with me, claiming that all student unions in the country are fully aware of this loan sale issue. However, teachers, including the guy running Manchester University, knew the loans would be sold but had no idea it was being readied now or indeed that the plan was resurrected in the recent budget. This may have something to do with Vince Cable broadcasting that the loan sale was on halt last summer some time...only to be included almost silently in the recent budget. And from what i can tell, nobody from anywhere has broadcast that that plan has now been cancelled and the sale is going ahead at full steam. I was even told by one journalist and someone running for a seat somehwere, that it isnt even included in the Tory election manifesto. Basically, it is an active policy to try and implement the sale through stealth and not make it an election issue. However, as the first 2 sales were done under Labour i think, maybe it is convenient for them both as its yet another area where they are identical in their lack of forward thinking ideas to steer our economy away from the same kind that the US and its corporate funders is trying to impose, via international trade treaties or war, on every country on the planet.
My basic aim has just been to get the info out that that those 1998-2012 loans are being readied for sale so that all those millions of students will be aware of whats coming and be able to follow it before they end up with their dreaded post-sale letter. I have been trying to get Russell Brand and Eddie Izzard to tweet it to their millions of followers, as many of them will be from the student community at sometime, but i havent had a bite yet. If anyone does have a twatter account, maybe you could give me a hand and tweet him to mention it at the very least. I know it isnt very important on the scale of things, but how these things seem to work in today's world, if either of those said something about it, and that would be by them just clicking the retweet button, it is something that would reach many of the kind of people who need to be warned. And on top of that, maybe it would enter the subject of student loans being sold into the election debate (my main goal), as its exclusion to me shows just how little these parties are being held to account about real things they are doing when it actually matters, i.e. when people are deciding who to vote for . After they are in power, what an individual thinks makes no difference, as today's politicians generally take the opinion that they have been chosen to enact their own policies, not implement the policies that those who voted for them want. A crucial difference.
Anyway, i know its off topic here, and i shall stop posting about it now unless something key happens, but i thought it would be of interest to jot a few thoughts down.

anna2007

Great work erudioed on getting some attention and discussion via twitter. If the NUS are so aware of what's going on, why aren't they ramping up their activities/protests NOW, before the election?!

Andrew McGettigan is the Higher Education expert who gave evidence at the BIS Select Committee's inquiry into student loans last year. He was the voice of reason, and demonstrated how the Government's proposals for the sale of further loans weren't sustainable in the longer term. He also wrote an article on MSE last year, commenting on the reduction in the deferment threshold here:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/loans/2014/10/guest-comment-how-banking-bonuses-have-hit-student-loan-repayments

It's pretty clear that the Tories are making preparations to move fast after the election, to get a sale through in the current financial year. Andrew McGettigan wrote this on his website, about the BIS memo that Mr McGuffin's linked to above:

http://andrewmcgettigan.org/2015/03/31/fast-move-on-student-loan-sale-possible/

Ironically, it's the man responsible for our own sale, Vince Cable, that has prevented a further sell off, as the decision was ultimately his:

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jul/20/vince-cable-cabinet-tensions-scrap-student-loan-sell-off

The Tories seem hell-bent on going ahead with a further sale, no matter the future implications, and if they win the G.E. and Vince/the lib dems are out of the picture, what's to stop them? Even if Labour win, they've been strangely quiet on the issue - I can't find any recent comments/objections from them, to say they oppose further sell offs? Given Labour's track record, they're possibly even more likely to go ahead with a sale. Maybe we can persuade the SNP to throw a spanner in the works!