ERUDIO student loans help

Brooker_Dave

Toothless regulators only looking after the needs of the well connected working out of tax havens?

BorderReiver14

Reading those posts from Mr McGuffin makes me think the FCA have templates at their contact centre... 'We cannot comment' and 'no comment' seems the standard reply.
Seems they are happy to sympathise with their first response but there after revert to 'no comment'
Also offer mild encouragement to send evidence of wrongdoing but keen to point out they are unable to tell you how they use it (read file away in a dark room to forget about).
Still, as I have pointed out to them, their responses are useful in that we can show we are exhausting all avenues.

eroneo

Challenge:

The last page of the annual statement has a change to one of the terms and conditions.

Can anybody spot it?

The plan must be to gradually publish reworkings of the old t&cs here and there in the 'help you understand' small print. No one will notice.

BorderReiver14

Good find if correct... Although making statements on our statements is not exactly saying we have agreed to changes in t&c and considering they can't calculate interest to save their lives, surely contravenes the original agreement anyway because they are supposed to supply us with an accurate statement.

Former_MSE_Helen

Hi everyone, we’ve had a look at the sale agreement document that anna2007 posted, and from a legal perspective, we unfortunately believe it confirms what we already knew – that Erudio CAN’T change the terms and conditions of loans, but that it CAN change how the loans are serviced.

Back in April 2014 when we pushed the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, it told us: "The terms and conditions of fixed term student loans, which are regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, have not changed as a result of their sale to Erudio.
"Borrowers have the same rights and obligations as they had when their loans were managed by the Student Loans Company. Erudio have adopted a different approach to the deferment application process which does not constitute a change to terms and conditions.
"The method of the deferment process is not part of the terms and conditions of the loan. Any decision about whether or not to offer short settlement is a matter for Erudio."

But of course if you’re having problems with Erudio, pre-1998 loans are covered by the Financial Ombudsman Service. So make a formal complaint to Erudio first, and if you don’t feel it has treated you fairly, you can then take it further. For full help see our Financial Ombudsman Service guide.

For information on how to complain about BIS itself, see this Gov.UK page. The current minister for universities is Jo Johnson (at the time of the sale it was David Willetts, but he is no longer an MP).

We are monitoring this thread as much as we are able to, but please feel free to PM anything you feel MSE should see.

MSE Helen

johnbhoy10

Not going to read the thread but i get the sentiment!!!

In a word they are 'IMCOMPETENTS'. I've had more calls to this shower in a couple of years than i did with nearly twenty years with The Student Loans Company. Never had an issue with them.

I provided this lot with all the evidence they required and they still get it wrong.

Long story short.....after they said my deferment request had been denied and if i wanted to contest i would have to reapply i told them to sod off and i was going straight to ombudsman!! End of! They phoned me back the next day and told me deferment was now granted and they would send me a cheque for £50. What's that all about???:think:

Cynical side of me thinks this lot are trying it on!!!

Don't want their compo cheque for silence next year just want them to get it right. Very unprofessional shower who give me no confidence whatsover. I'll be ready for them next year if they're still allowed to run this by then.

AReeves

I have a legal opinion on the Sale Agreement.
I am not going to put the advice in the public forum.
If you want the view on it, then send me a PM.
I have already sent a PM to a few known contacts in this forum.

Anthony Reeves
Lawyer

MSE_Helen wrote: »

Hi everyone, we’ve had a look at the sale agreement document that anna2007 posted, and from a legal perspective, we unfortunately believe it confirms what we already knew – that Erudio CAN’T change the terms and conditions of loans, but that it CAN change how the loans are serviced.

Back in April 2014 when we pushed the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, it told us: "The terms and conditions of fixed term student loans, which are regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, have not changed as a result of their sale to Erudio.
"Borrowers have the same rights and obligations as they had when their loans were managed by the Student Loans Company. Erudio have adopted a different approach to the deferment application process which does not constitute a change to terms and conditions.
"The method of the deferment process is not part of the terms and conditions of the loan. Any decision about whether or not to offer short settlement is a matter for Erudio."

BorderReiver14

MSE_Helen wrote: »

"The method of the deferment process is not part of the terms and conditions of the loan.

The method of deferment meaning a DAF.... No one would really have any issues if Erudio accepted that they cannot force people to use a DAF which does try to trick people in to accepting subtle changes in terms and conditions.

eroneo

MSE_Helen wrote: »

"The method of the deferment process is not part of the terms and conditions of the loan."

Quite right. If the SLC used pens with BLACK ink to deal with deferment paperwork and Erudio use pens with BLUE ink, it changes the deferment process without affecting the terms and conditions of the loan. So they are entitled to make such changes to their internal process.

However, If they declare on a new DAF that borrowers must only use BLUE ink and then refuse deferment from borrowers who filled it in with BLACK ink, they have changed the terms and conditions.

There is a new condition that BLUE ink must be used. It does not say that in the original contract.

It would be a breach of contract if Erudio refused deferment based on ink colour EVEN if they say it is their policy.

Pluthero

"The terms and conditions of fixed term student loans, which are regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, have not changed as a result of their sale to Erudio.
"Borrowers have the same rights and obligations as they had when their loans were managed by the Student Loans Company. Erudio have adopted a different approach to the deferment application process which does not constitute a change to terms and conditions.
"The method of the deferment process is not part of the terms and conditions of the loan. Any decision about whether or not to offer short settlement is a matter for Erudio."


Hmmmmm,

A game of semantics then...

Well as it appears we can read any interpretation into the sell off agreement I am going with this:

Same Rights I am interpreting this as our Right defer the loans if under the threshold just like with the SLC

Obligations = To show income evidence is above/below the deferment threshold.

[STRIKE]Erudio[/STRIKE] Some Graduates have adopted a different approach to the deferment application process which does not constitute a change to terms and conditions (or their Deferal Rights)

"The method of the deferment process is not part of the terms and conditions of the loan." So its not set down in law or in the original terms and conditions that any DAF or form is prescribed for use. So I can use any bespoke form or evidence. Good to know and have it in BLACK and WHITE from BIS.

WHOO hoo, looking forward to a few more years of painless deferring then FREEDOMMMMM

Thanks for clearing that up for us Helen.