ERUDIO student loans help

erudioed

thats the wilmington trust's address, the bunch who put together the shell company/structure that Erudio is (and Honours Student Loans). Its probably them who also move the cash from Erudio to Arrow Global/Carval's Guernsey based tax havens.
From what i understand, The Wilmington Trust are the one stop shop for setting up a shell company and getting those shells up, legit (as the law allows) and running.

halfpricedebt

So really, any correspondence to Erudio should go to that London address. That's the registered place of business.

Tempting to drop an email to Mignon. Ridiculous name.

fermi

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08605918

anna2007

I received the ombudsman's final decision this morning, on my first FOS complaint (credit reporting/searches, insisting on DD, illegible copy loan agreements and messing about with the deferment dates). She has partly upheld the complaint, increased compensation from £150 to £200 and instructed Erudio to provide reconstituted copies of the agreements.

No surprise regarding the credit reporting - she thinks Erudio is entitled to share the deferral information. There are a few points worth mentioning though -

I said it was unfair that Erudio wasn't letting me know when the loans would be reported to CRA's, the ombudsman says "Erudio has informed us that it intends to start reporting information to the credit reference agencies at the end of 2015".

She states that I may wish to challenge the interpretation of credit reporting in the courts, so it's good to know that if I accept the FOS decision, I can still use the courts if/when the loans are reported to CRA's.

On the use of the "payment holiday" status for reporting the loans, she says "Erudio has confirmed that it intends to start reporting deferred loans as payment holidays, under the option of 'no payment due'. So not a payment holiday then, but it's ok for Erudio to use the term "payment holiday" to scare the crap out of its customers.

On the credit agreements, Erudio say they can't provide clearer copies because the original agreements are with the previous owners and it only has the scanned copies on its system. Thought it was a bit strange that SLC (or BIS) would keep the original agreements, when they no longer own the loans.

halfpricedebt

So the people who now own our loans don't have the original credit agreements?

And also everything erudio has said so far has been a lie regarding CRAs. I find it amazing they keep paying out for these things. They gave me £100 after I complained over the phone. With the amount they keep paying out you'd think chasing after worthless loans wouldn't be a big deal to them!

anna2007

halfpricedebt wrote: »

So the people who now own our loans don't have the original credit agreements?

My first thought when I read that was maybe they lost the original agreements in a big fire (or more likely incompetence) and there are now issues for Erudio about enforcing a microfiched agreement... probably wishful thinking...

halfpricedebt wrote: »

And also everything erudio has said so far has been a lie regarding CRAs. I find it amazing they keep paying out for these things. They gave me £100 after I complained over the phone. With the amount they keep paying out you'd think chasing after worthless loans wouldn't be a big deal to them!

Even though Erudio have said they'll report our loans by the end of the year, I still can't quite believe they'll take the risk. I guess it's all about risk vs profit for them, and there's only a small minority fighting them - if they think they can collect more than it'll cost to defend their actions and tactics, then that's what they'll do. It obviously works, based on Arrow Global's profits.

Arrow Global and CarVal are really the ones who should be getting the criticism here (if we forget for a second about our Government who are ultimately liable), but we blame the faceless, deskless, non-existent excuse for an a-hole Erudio instead. Maybe we should all put "Arrow Global/CarVal" at the top of every single post on here - I'm sure they wouldn't be keen on being linked to the negative experiences on this forum.

Brooker_Dave

anna2007 wrote: »

Even though Erudio have said they'll report our loans by the end of the year, I still can't quite believe they'll take the risk.

If they report the loans as "payment holidays" which would imply to other lenders that we are unable to meet our financial commitments, then we have all been missold.

We were told in no uncertain terms that having a student loan would not impact our ability to get other credit/financial products in the future.

That promise turned out to be a lie, thus we were missold.

Since the FOS, who seem to be staffed at least in parts by people who used to act for Arrow, seem to be toothless and unwilling to look at the fundamental issues, some sort of group action focussing on the misselling would be the way forward?

fermi

Makes sense to me that SLC would retain original paperwork to safeguard it, and I suspect that was in the terms of the sale agreement.

gardenia101

anna2007 wrote: »

I received the ombudsman's final decision this morning, on my first FOS complaint (credit reporting/searches, insisting on DD, illegible copy loan agreements and messing about with the deferment dates). She has partly upheld the complaint, increased compensation from £150 to £200 and instructed Erudio to provide reconstituted copies of the agreements.

No surprise regarding the credit reporting - she thinks Erudio is entitled to share the deferral information. There are a few points worth mentioning though -

I said it was unfair that Erudio wasn't letting me know when the loans would be reported to CRA's, the ombudsman says "Erudio has informed us that it intends to start reporting information to the credit reference agencies at the end of 2015".

She states that I may wish to challenge the interpretation of credit reporting in the courts, so it's good to know that if I accept the FOS decision, I can still use the courts if/when the loans are reported to CRA's.

That's interesting - I was under the impression that if I accepted the actual ombudsman's decision rather than the adjudicator's then I couldn't go to court. I'm still waiting for my ombudsman's decision so I don't know what I'm going to do next, but I have asked for clarification about what may happen if Erudio report my loans a few years after my FOS case is over. I don't understand how FOS can say that I can't take further steps if my file is trashed years down the line. Hoping I've got the wrong end of the stick.

On the use of the "payment holiday" status for reporting the loans, she says "Erudio has confirmed that it intends to start reporting deferred loans as payment holidays, under the option of 'no payment due'. So not a payment holiday then, but it's ok for Erudio to use the term "payment holiday" to scare the crap out of its customers.

Is that reporting with one particular CRA or all of them? I'm still struggling to see how I can be in payment holiday for up to 3 years due to my deferment period. Or even at all actually

On the credit agreements, Erudio say they can't provide clearer copies because the original agreements are with the previous owners and it only has the scanned copies on its system. Thought it was a bit strange that SLC (or BIS) would keep the original agreements, when they no longer own the loans.

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

If they report the loans as "payment holidays" which would imply to other lenders that we are unable to meet our financial commitments, then we have all been missold.

We were told in no uncertain terms that having a student loan would not impact our ability to get other credit/financial products in the future.

That promise turned out to be a lie, thus we were missold.

Since the FOS, who seem to be staffed at least in parts by people who used to act for Arrow, seem to be toothless and unwilling to look at the fundamental issues, some sort of group action focussing on the misselling would be the way forward?

This is one of the issues I've kept asking FOS, but I don't seem to have had a definite answer. In my case they keep banging on about the large print issues, as if that's all that matters to me. Easy option?

Can anyone remind me if they've had any luck complaining to the FCA?

erudioed

One area also up for some debate about CRA reporting is that on the back of Erudio's first lot of gumpf about CRA reporting, its says others in your household may also be affected, such is the nature of CRAs. I remember being refused a loan once because my mum missed a payment to Kay's catalogue by 2 days (i found out after much work). However, i was told by BIS, that a student loan cannot affect another individual as it is unique to the loanee. I reversed my original idea that they wouldnt report our loans and thats its just a threat, but now i lean more towards them doing it, otherwise why would they now be giving these loose dates out. Hopefully not, but i hope they are 100% sure they know all the legalities of their actions because if not, they will have a few hundred thousand people sniffing a pay out, as well as those connected to those people who may end up getting some influence on their credit file because of it. I for one will be broadcasting it far and wide if they were sueable/in breach of some regulation in the eyes of regulators, as would i am sure some journalists who would also like to broadcast the continuance of their earlier stories on reporting to CRAs.
If i didnt think it would harm people, i would encourage them to do it to see what happens. I would be licking my lips and waiting. However, if there is just a small chance it may affect someone, and it is clear no one is 100% sure (from the Ombudsman to CRAs), in ways that have far reaching, life changing ways (being refused a mortgage, bank account etc), they should refrain from taking the action.