ERUDIO student loans help

fermi

Your 97 loan would have s16, which Erudio contend means they can report whether you like it or not.

98 and 99 loans can only be reported if you default, or if you give Erudio consent for them to do so. Which they phished for with their forms if you were not careful over what parts you signed.

halfpricedebt

So in that case wouldn't it make sense to pay the balance for the 97 loan and settle that way? To be honest the £30% of the total borrowed would cover that first loan anyway.

If they would have to ask my permission to report the other two then there's not much they can do surely?

fermi

May be worth asking if they can split settlement that way, assuming they don't think the have the right to report on the later ones, which they may think they do.

halfpricedebt

Interestingly I tweeted James from Experian on Twitter and asked if a partial flag impacts your credit score. He said "not in my experience".

Also I read that all the mortgage style loans Erudio bought are under the post-1998 regs which would include the one I took out in 97.

Pluthero

BorderReiver14 wrote: »

Hi all... Where has Erudio admitted in an FOS response that they are not allowed to do a credit search as the original t&c do not allow it?

No news with my case. Ombudsman will be looking at it. Going to take legal action too as you all know its the only way to get them to $#+$ off.

Here is the section from an FOS complaint :

Firstly I can understand that Miss Z didn’t want to allow Erudio to carry out credit checks but Erudio has agreed that she can delete that portion. They have accepted that this was not part of the terms and conditions of her original loans. Like our adjudicator I believe that Erudio can share information that they hold on Miss Z. That said, our adjudicator confirmed that Erudio should remove any adverse data that has been recorded on Miss Z’s credit record. I believe this is a fair outcome.

So they have admitted to the FOS they can't do a credit check. But the FOS also side with £rudio on the CRA reporting issue.


Today I received a response to my 2015 deferment letter/income evidence (I will not use their DAF) and AMAZINGLY it quotes the 1997 regs in the 1998 disguise:

[FONT=Default Sans Serif,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Erudio has adopted a different approach to the deferment application process than the Student Loans Company (SLC) previously applied. The information we are asking for will help us to confirm your current gross income and determine your likely gross income over the next three months in order to satisfy the conditions of deferment. This change in approach does not constitute a change to the terms and conditions of the loan as prescribed in the Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1998.

Section 11 of the Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1997 states:
“Subject to the provisions of this regulation, a borrower who has not been required to make an immediate repayment of the outstanding amount of his loan under regulation 9(b) shall be entitled to defer making repayments of that loan if he satisfies the loans administrator –

(a) that his gross income for the month preceding the month in which he applies for deferment does not exceed the product of £1,316 and the annual adjustment, and
(b) if the loans administrator so requires, that his gross average monthly income during the three months immediately following the month first referred to in sub-paragraph (a) will not or is unlikely to exceed that amount.”

We can confirm that we do require you to fully complete a DAF, including signing and dating section nine.
[/FONT]

Unreal.

I agree BorderReiver, Court is the only way to go!

fermi

halfpricedebt wrote: »

Interestingly I tweeted James from Experian on Twitter and asked if a partial flag impacts your credit score. He said "not in my experience".

The reason he gives for that is because there is "likely to be a default"

http://i.imgur.com/AZ49LH0.png

i.e. the impact of the partial settlement is negligible compared to that.

In a case like this where there is no default I can't imagine you can just disregard the impact.

If there was none then there would be no point in having that marker available or ever used.

Anyway, Experian scores are not used by lenders, so what they think of them is not really important.

It's what any prospective mortgage lender etc would think when seeing that marker that matters.

fermi

Pluthero wrote: »

[FONT=Default Sans Serif,Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Section 11 of the Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1997 states:[/FONT]

Cannot believe Erudio are still lying about which regulations apply.

halfpricedebt

He's asked if I'm in deferment period or in default. I'm neither so will see what he says. I've made my first payment now I can't defer so my account is currently in good shape.

halfpricedebt

He says under the current circumstances - I'm not in default or arrears, then it's unlikely to even appear on my credit file. Seeking clarification that this would still be the case following a settlement.

Ok. He says if they agree to a Full and Final Settlement then that suggests that everyone is happy but to get those intentions in writing in case there's ever any questions.

fermi

So a tacit admission that if they should put a partial settlement marker on an undefaulted account then that would likely be seen pretty negatively.

Whether Erudio go ahead and mark credit files as they have threatened has been a long running thing, and as said previously they have not gone through with 99% of the claims they have made on what they intend to do.

However, as has also been said a big part of the negotiation in any settlement agreement is how credit files will me marked, so you have comeback if they do something legal but different to what was negotiated.

Should always be set down and agreed writing from the creditor in advance of payment.

halfpricedebt wrote: »

Ok. He says if they agree to a Full and Final Settlement then that suggests that everyone is happy but to get those intentions in writing in case there's ever any questions.

Happy, but that does not mean that a partial settlement marker could not be added if you don't negotiate around it, or that if they did it would not be seen as being negative.

Also depends on the rest of your file though.

If other defaults are present then impact would not be big.

If everything else on your credit file is great, a partial settlement could be a crucial negative when looking at something like a mortgage application.

It is all relative, and all up to each individual lender you apply to how they would look at it, not Experian.