ERUDIO student loans help

FuriousFeline

Minimum of 56 days? Still no new specified dates though! Presumably the way Erudio's student loan database works is that the accounts of all individuals whose loans have reached the end of their current deferment periods without having been granted a further one are flagged up on the system, then letters demanding payment are automatically generated for their admin staff to send out. This will be a system which works based on the dates they have got stored, which is why it is vital for Erudio to give us each new dates rather than making a vague statement on their website. All I have so far seen on letters from Erudio is that my current deferment (without any extension specified) ends on May 9th, with them expecting a payment on the 10th if no further deferment period has been granted. I would not be at all surprised if, soon after May 10th, I get a letter informing me that 'payment is now due,' unless of course they get my DAF processed and approved before then (which seems unlikely). Based on the statement on their website, I should have until at least June 1st for my DAF to be processed, but I have had no acknowledgement of this.

erudioed

Heres a new article about banks stealing Higher Education by Irvine Welsh for Vice. Erudio and Arrow Global make a brief cameo:
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/irvine-welsh-how-the-banks-stole-higher-education

BaffledByErudio

Hello folks,
Hopefully this is a sign things are running smoother at Erudio.
I received a deferment form in the post, but in the interim, I'd been sent another by email.
I filled it out in a very sketchy way, adding the details I knew I was legally obliged to. In fact I added less information than I have previously. Attached a PDF of earnings proof and emailed it back. I have been notified my deferment has been approved.
While this, for myself is assuring, it's also so, so confusing.
Again, it makes me question whether they DO have ulterior motives with their 'herding kittens' approach, or if it genuinely is that they took on a debt with no idea just how unusual it is compared to ignored and bad debt Arrow is accustomed to.
I'm confused because I hear/read different stories. I have a friend, one of a handful from Uni, who I know still defer and she's yet to receive a form. In the mail or electronically. Quite what they're beggering about at is anybody's guess.
Is it salaries? If we're on genuinely poor wages are they just giving us the green light with a nod, but messing higher earners about?
Is it genuinely smoke and mirrors to try and trick folk who aren't on the ball, knowing nothing of this idiocy into inadvertant arrears, or is it, to coin :money:'s classic comment at the start of this idiocy 'classic c0ck-up territory'?
S'pose, we've probably learned now that we're not likely to get an answer while official financial watchdogs are seemingly taking a break to munch Pedigree Chum every time a complaint hits their kennel door!
Anyway, where's that cocaine? Man the decks, shore leave is over now I'm deferred for another year. I'm bound for Barbados. Lexy dear, take off that top and rub in the Ambre Solaire.....ahhhhh, that's it bae!

anna2007

erudioed wrote: »

Heres a new article about banks stealing Higher Education by Irvine Welsh for Vice. Erudio and Arrow Global make a brief cameo:
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/irvine-welsh-how-the-banks-stole-higher-education

I agree with most of what Irvine Welsh says there, but after seeing him talk the talk on QT recently, then backtrack, pretty sure he doesn't walk the walk. You're either a leftie or you're not, you either believe in socialism and equality or you don't. But if you sign up for tax evasion, you can't then lay the blame on the systems that allow you to do it, which is what he ended up doing on QT. It made me cringe to watch... but still think Trainspotting was pure dead brilliant

anna2007

@Baffled I wouldn't venture near Barbados, Zach Lewy's bound to be waving at you from his nearby yacht, last thing you need when you're trying to forget your Erudio woes and having the Piz Buin (posher?) rubbed all over

I'm sure you're right about the green light on certain deferment applications - if you have a low income, low outstanding balance and/or cancellation looming, they're not too bothered. It makes financial sense that they focus on the other end. That's definitely my experience, and I know of others who get a fairly easy ride by Erudio standards. We have to put ourselves in their shoes, think how they will be thinking, then their tactics become so obvious.

Have you looked out your old SLC statement from 2008?

FuriousFeline

I have just received a letter from Erudio approving my application for deferment. However, the start and end dates of the deferment period are the same as they have been this year, so where did the 56 days we were supposed to be allowed altogether come in?! Although they dealt with my DAF by the original date of the end of my current deferment period, I wonder what were they planning on doing if it hadn't been processed in time? I could have done without the worry of not knowing whether or not it was going to be processed in time and whether they were going to be demanding payment (and putting my account in arrears) if it had not been.

Brooker_Dave

erudioed wrote: »

Heres a new article about banks stealing Higher Education by Irvine Welsh for Vice. Erudio and Arrow Global make a brief cameo:
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/irvine-welsh-how-the-banks-stole-higher-education

Carval's adventures with "love hotels" in Japan:

"KAWAGOE, Japan — Several years ago, an investment subsidiary of the agricultural giant Cargill bought a group of so-called love hotels, which typically rent rooms by the hour, including the neon-lit Hotel Shine in this sprawling Tokyo suburb.Though many industry analysts say love hotels in Japan are a good cash flow business — catering to young married couples living with family, as well as to philanderers, prostitutes and even penny-pinching tourists — the Cargill subsidiary was disappointed with its results. The unit, CarVal Investors, sold the 10 properties last week for about $20 million, far less than the $60 million it paid for them in 2004 and 2005.
It might have been just another fire sale. After all, many American funds invested in distressed properties at the height of Japan’s economic woes without success.


But CarVal is now under fire from former employees and business partners in part because of the tough tactics of the new owner: an affiliate of a Japanese developer, the Kato Pleasure Group. Immediately after closing the sale on Thursday, the buyer dispatched groups of black-suited men to force out hotel workers and even hotel guests, barricading the entrances with wooden fences.
About 300 hotel workers have been left in the lurch. They are planning a rally outside Cargill’s Tokyo offices this week to protest their treatment. Two executives who managed the hotels under contract during CarVal’s ownership have refused to leave and remain inside Hotel Shine — a standoff that has drawn the attention of the local police.


The most vocal opponent of the sale, however, is CarVal’s former partner, Alchemy, which had a contract to manage the hotels. In registered letters, filed in court, Alchemy contends that CarVal violated business agreements by selling the properties before their contract was up in October 2014.
In submissions to both the local Tokyo and Saitama Metropolitan Police, Alchemy also contends that Kato Pleasure has ties to Japan’s criminal underground and that CarVal ignored repeated warnings — backed up by outside research — not to go through with the sale."


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/02/business/global/conflict-in-cargill-sale-of-love-hotel-in-japan.html?_r=0


It would seem that when Carval makes a bad investment, they offload it to anyone?

anna2007

I've been looking at the FOS decision on my complaint about Erudio's annual statement, as I accepted it in October 2015, but Erudio still haven't complied with parts a) and b) of the final decision, copy here:

http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=94940

The ombudsman refused to rule on the enforceability of the agreement, saying it was a court matter. However, she did agree that "where statements haven’t complied with legislation, I would expect interest to be waived for that period. This is what Erudio is offering, and I think it’s fair". She then instructs Erudio to "waive the interest for the period of the incorrect statement(s)", which is legally binding on Erudio.

Given what we now know about the non-compliant SLC statement from 2008, I'm not surprised Erudio haven't complied with the FOS decision. I only complained about Erudio's 2014 statement, so the fact she has said statements (plural), is something of a gift - it acknowledges that if there are errors in other statements, interest should be waived for that period too. Section 77a of the CCA says the period of non-compliance begins immediately after the end of the period covered in the statement (so 1 September 2008) until a correct statement is given (which they still haven't done, so the period of non-compliance is ongoing).

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/77A

Should I raise a new FOS complaint about Erudio not complying with the original FOS decision, and add in the 2008 statement (so Erudio are hit with a new FOS fee and further compensation)? Or should I forget about FOS and apply for a court order to have the decision enforced?

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/factsheets/enforcing-an-ombudsmans-decision.pdf

The adjudicator told me over 5 weeks ago that he was waiting on a response from Erudio and I've heard nothing since. I'll chase it up and also find out if Erudio's been reported to the FCA, for not complying with the decision.

anna2007

I've made an FOI request to SLC for the templates used for annual statements, NOSIAs etc, copy here:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/template_documents_used_in_the_a/new

AReeves

In my view, I would simply take steps to enforce the award. Don't need to make a further complaint to FOS to enforce an award which has been accepted by the consumer. According to the guidelines, the FOS should report the matter to the regulator (FCA).

anna2007 wrote: »

I've been looking at the FOS decision on my complaint about Erudio's annual statement, as I accepted it in October 2015, but Erudio still haven't complied with parts a) and b) of the final decision, copy here:

http://www.ombudsman-decisions.org.uk/viewPDF.aspx?FileID=94940

The ombudsman refused to rule on the enforceability of the agreement, saying it was a court matter. However, she did agree that "where statements haven’t complied with legislation, I would expect interest to be waived for that period. This is what Erudio is offering, and I think it’s fair". She then instructs Erudio to "waive the interest for the period of the incorrect statement(s)", which is legally binding on Erudio.

Given what we now know about the non-compliant SLC statement from 2008, I'm not surprised Erudio haven't complied with the FOS decision. I only complained about Erudio's 2014 statement, so the fact she has said statements (plural), is something of a gift - it acknowledges that if there are errors in other statements, interest should be waived for that period too. Section 77a of the CCA says the period of non-compliance begins immediately after the end of the period covered in the statement (so 1 September 2008) until a correct statement is given (which they still haven't done, so the period of non-compliance is ongoing).

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/77A

Should I raise a new FOS complaint about Erudio not complying with the original FOS decision, and add in the 2008 statement (so Erudio are hit with a new FOS fee and further compensation)? Or should I forget about FOS and apply for a court order to have the decision enforced?

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/factsheets/enforcing-an-ombudsmans-decision.pdf

The adjudicator told me over 5 weeks ago that he was waiting on a response from Erudio and I've heard nothing since. I'll chase it up and also find out if Erudio's been reported to the FCA, for not complying with the decision.