ERUDIO student loans help

Brooker_Dave

anna2007 wrote: »

If assignment is enforcement, then the real scandal is the Government did it, knowing that the agreements are unenforceable, after spending ridiculous amounts of public money on lawyers/PwC, to try and make it workable.

But we're governed by slippery 1%ers with shellcompanies in taxhavens, so it's no real surprise that the BIS would happily sell us out.

But, why would Carval buy a load of unenforceable loans?

And it's not as if Arrow (from the tax haven of Guernsey) aren't past masters of screwing money out of hapless people by buying up distressed loans?

BorderReiver14

...Because it's been covered up? Because 99% of ex students are merrily signing DAFs, paying ESL, using their online portal etc and not reading between the lines or indeed any terms and conditions. As Anna has suggested it is completely plausible that our loans were 'insured' or 'securities' taken out so that they still profit regardless how it pans out. If the loans are unenforceable are Erudio breaking any laws by presenting them as otherwise? If they are unenforceable, who in government, BIS, SLC etc knew this and have laws been broken to cover it up. It would already appear that fibs were told to Parliament by describing the loans as distressed.

fermi

Paul/Pt2537 = Paul Tilley

https://consumercreditlitigationanddebtcollection.wordpress.com/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13349239

http://www.qualitysolicitors.com/howlettclarke/our-people/paul-tilley

Brooker_Dave

fermi wrote: »

Paul/Pt2537 = Paul Tilley

https://consumercreditlitigationanddebtcollection.wordpress.com/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13349239

http://www.qualitysolicitors.com/howlettclarke/our-people/paul-tilley

So how would Erudio go about putting all this right?

I assume if you just ignore them, they have 6 years to get their act together and issue a claim, otherwise Carval go hungry?

Would it also be fair to assume all the threats of reporting to CRAs are just empty threats until they get their paperwork in order?

Lungboy

I assume SLC put it right by amending the later annual statements? Or would that not be enough?

FuriousFeline

I have just read a new comment under Emma Lunn's article about Erudio in The Guardian which I wanted to reply to on the Guardian site but couldn't as comments are apparently now closed. The person commenting says that they are very close to 50, the age at which the loans should be written off, and is wondering whether Erudio are deliberately messing around people of a similar age to force them into arrears, which means that they then become ineligible for their loans to be written off. It wouldn't at all surprise me if Erudio are employing this tactic, meaning people affected would then become liable to pay Erudio back until the day they die!

erudioed

That will definitely be one tactic FuriousFeline, long insinuated throughout these very pages!.
They didnt print my comment under that article for a reason i dont fully understand.

On a seperate issue, I also highlight again, just because it does suggest they have an alternative revenue stream off of these loans as Anna indicates, they are not letting anyone settle up short, even if it means still making a profit on their investment. That must mean something!

And on an even more separate issue, Greece is still trying to stop the troika from imposing this debt selling market on them. In Greece, the business takes the hit but its responsible lenders have a different plan to make people even more miserable and suicidal! http://en.protothema.gr/lenders-reject-the-new-greek-proposal-on-non-performing-loans/
I dont think the Greek citizens will know what hits them when scumbags like Arrow Global start getting involved and pestering them for cash 24hrs a day. Also makes one wonder how the idea of selling debt ever became a good idea.

Sarebear78

It has probably been covered MANY times (but I am easily confused!) - but is it only one other person that has gone to court to exercise their right to defer and one who got a lawyer to write to them to do so?

Think @BorderReiver14 had a deferral in place previously but has not signed a DAF (Is that right?).

Going to go down the complaint, FOS then court route. Didn't have to do court last year as they accepted an amended DAF. I have a DD in place so they will, undoubtedly, begin taking money. Do I claim that money back under the direct debit guarantee every time they take it?

Also can you have as many complaints with them on the go at once as you like as I don't want them to be lumped together as this gives the Ombudsman the option to selectively see what they want to see?

Lungboy

You could cancel your DD, putting you into arrears and making them default and chase you. Reclaiming the money via the DD guarantee would do the same thing I think. The "safe" option is to let them take the money then claim it back as part of a court claim, if you can afford to do that.

FuriousFeline

What if we just don't have the money to do the 'safe' option? I am in that position, and I'm sure others are. I still haven't had confirmation in writing from Erudio that the end date of my current deferment period is being extended because the DAFs were sent out late. I cancelled the DD the other year because I knew there just wouldn't be the money for Erudio to take, and I am still in this position. Even if I still had a DD in place, the bank wouldn't let Erudio take money that isn't there. They can demand money all they want, but they won't be able to get blood out of a stone!