ERUDIO student loans help

Pluthero

Looks good lungboy.

Erudio will not defer you if you do not use their DAF.

The FOS will be little help and are refusing to rule on the DAF issue. See the weasel words in the above fos complaints.

I would send an edited version of the DAF, see Annas in the above for example. Otherwise You will need a lawyer and months of hassle.

Erudio has admitted in an fos response that they are not allowed to do a credit search as the original terms do not allow it.

The CRA threat is still a hollow One and may actually not affect credit scores. And whether you use the DAF or not Erudio they are insisting the original terms allow it. FOS will be no help with this either.

So save yourself the grief. Erudio and regulators do not give a fack. They are making enough money.

Just keep your correspondence should should erudio pull any !!!! in future.

anna2007

@ Lungboy Good letter, it might be worth adding as much of Erudio's warranty and declaration as you're willing to agree to? The first three points are harmless, and it would show to a court if need be that you're being reasonable in agreeing to what you can, without it affecting your rights under the loan agreement. If we go by the Hansard documents when the legislation was passed, the deferment process is meant to be one of self-certification, so I think you should 'certify' in the letter, either in your own words, or by adapting Erudio's declaration on the DAF.

Where you say " the DAF asks me to allow you to..." you could add "search my credit file and...", just to be clear that you don't consent to the searches as well as the reporting.

More news on deferment - after posting earlier today about emailing Erudio, I arrived home to a letter from Erudio in the post, confirming the deferment. It was dated 27 April and sent second class, so definitely sent before I emailed yesterday morning. So it took Erudio 4 days to process my application... a benchmark to judge these cretins by. My Noddle account had its monthly update today, no search (which according to Experian go on your file instantly) or recording of student loans. Which got me thinking, that's two deferments where Erudio haven't had to access my credit file to verify my identity or my income, they're perfectly capable of accepting the application without accessing my credit file, so they have no 'legitimate need' to do it?

I have to agree with Pluthero about amending the DAF, rather than refusing to use it, only because I'm sure that Erudio's aim is for us to refuse to use the DAF so they rake in more money - how else could they turn a legitimate deferrer into someone who (they then claim) has to pay? Erudio's main weapon has been to make the DAF as objectionable as possible, in the hope of turning deferrers into defaulters or payers. Their threats over credit ratings amount to nada, over a year later. I'm thinking I'd rather stop worrying about what Erudio might do, and wait until they actually do something.

fermi

From another thread

veeek8 wrote: »

So I tried to file an official complaint with Erudio about four times and it was ignored. I went to the FOS and I am getting a healthy compensation sum. I would beg anyone else to do the same, it is imperative this company learns to follow financial guidelines.

They have also told me that no-one has had their details sent to credit reference agencies for deferring and that this is only a potential future policy. Sounds like back pedalling doesn't it!

When calling them up I am also sensing a change in their response, from a debt collection agent style to one more befitting a financial institution...

gustavep

For those following this thread for a while, I'm the person who had my loan deferment application accepted without completing Erudio's invasive form.

I made a complaint to the FOS about the form and Erudio's lies in their complaint response - mainly quoting the 1997 legislation as justification for requiring a form. The adjudicator has upheld my complaint over their dealing with my concerns.

As above, the FOS has told me they are unable to rule on the requirement to use the form, only if Erudio is being unreasonable or unfair in their administration.

The really interesting point was the resolution offered by Erudio. I could complete and return the form and they would backdate the deferment application very kind of them except they'd already agreed to defer my loan. Speaking to the adjudicator, he told me that Erudio had told him the loans weren't deferred.

Either Eruido are now lying to the FOS, or they don't have a clue about the status of anyone's loans. Either way I don't see how they're fit to hold a credit license.

halfpricedebt

I've been speaking to Erudio since they have lowered the threshold by £2k and I am now over the deferment threshold.

I asked them what would happen if I made an offer to settle the account. Hypothetically I said I might be able to give them £3k so what would happen if I did that. They said that they would tell CRAs that I partially settled if they accepted my offer.

What I want to know is whether they can actually do this if they've agreed to settle? Surely that's going back on the agreement to settle the account for a certain amount? Does anyone know if it damages your credit rating to partially settle? Experian has this to say:

"‘Partial settlement’ is one of several flags that lenders who share data through Experian can use to add further information to an account. Other examples cover debt management plans, temporary arrangements to pay and voluntary termination. I don’t believe these flags are usually used in credit scoring, but they could well be included in a lender’s underwriting policy rules. This could mean that the appearance of a flag on your report would trigger a manual review of your application, where the additional information could then be considered by one of the lender’s underwriting experts. The upshot of this is that the effect of a partial settlement flag on any future credit application really depends on the policies of any lender you approach, which are likely to reflect how their past customers have behaved. Of course, partial settlement can take place for a variety of reasons, not all linked to debt relief. As a result, I’m not sure it’s something you really need to worry about. If you’re up to date with your current payments, have a positive past repayment record and can afford to service any further credit you’re applying for, there’s every chance the lender will give you a shot."

but I'm still not clear on it. Any ideas?

Lungboy

Partial means just that, you didn't pay the full outstanding amount but it's settled.

fermi

Yes, correct. The ICO is also fine and has agreed with those flags being used by lenders in that way under the DPA.

http://www.scoronline.co.uk/files/scor/high_level_prinicples_document_final.pdf

Your record should be closed and marked as partially settled if:

• The lender accepts final settlement of the account for less than the balance outstanding

Brooker_Dave

These loans were sold on the basis that provided there was no defult they would have no effect on a borrowers credit file, it would seem that even if you make a settlement with arrow/carvel your credit file gets a black mark?

Could these loans have been any more mis-sold than they clearly have been?

erudioed

You state an important point Brooker Dave, i think its at the crux of why Erudio are dithering about anything related to CRAs. As Anna and others note, none of the CRAs can guarantee that it wont have a negative affect if they do start reporting our loans to CRAs. As such, and unless it can be guaranteed to be harmless, then it can only be a malicious act to go ahead and report anyway. It would mean Arrow Global had decided to go ahead for their own purposes, not prioritising their 'customers' and thus 'treating them fairly'. And that could open them up to a potential sheetstorm...

halfpricedebt

Amazingly I've been on the phone to Erudio this morning.

I broke my leg two months ago and have not been at my home address for that amount of time. I came back to find the deferment letter which outlined the lowering of the threshold which now means I'm eligible to pay. The deferment period ends on 9/5/15 after which time I will go into arrears if I haven't arranged to pay anything.

So, yesterday they told me they could do an income/expenditure form over the phone. Last night and this morning they have not been able to get the form on the system without it "crashing". Yesterday they said they could put my account on hold if they needed to post out an income/expenditure form. Today they've told me they can put the account on hold but it will still go into arrears if I don't make a minimum payment by the 10th May. So what constitutes "on hold" then? Basically because I can't do it over the phone due to their system "crashing" they are saying I need to do it by post and risk my account going into arrears unless I cough up £158 which I've told them I can't afford.

Several times I asked to speak to a supervisor and he ignored me. When I insisted he said there were no managers, when I questioned why there would be no managers in a department dealing with this he said "well, there are but they are all busy". I really don't know what to do. If I pay the £158 it means they are blackmailing me to do so and I'm worried that if I pay it they will want to set up a direct debit and won't honour the income/expenditure offer.

I asked them further about settlements and they said that the current settlement figure is the full amount. When I pointed out that a settlement figure is meant to be a percentage of the full amount he said they could generate another offer so it appears there is a potential for this to have wiggle room.

I've checked on Equifax and my student loans don't appear to be registered on there so can they even report anything to a CRA if they agree to settle?

I'd really appreciate some swift advice on this because I'm feeling a little like they are no better than bailiffs and are just threatening me because they can. Initially when he said he would put my account on hold I asked him to send a confirmation via email seeing as they have my email address but he said they couldn't. When I asked why he gave me some waffle about not having all my details?! I feel like I need to speak to someone else there but am worried I will waste another hour of my life.