ERUDIO student loans help

fermi

BaffledByErudio wrote: »

On the subject of CRAs, Arrow's FAQs (while constantly assuring customers are treated fairly) indicate credit files could be hurt by defaults and arrears on debts they have purchased. And while I accept that we're in a slightly different boat (maybe a bit like a stricken, but still steady life raft aside the doomed Titanic), there is no mention of any 'oooh, we need to tell tales on you to check you're not fibbing about the millions you have stashed in that Swiss bank account' scenario. And that's my illustrative imagination there! I basically refer to Erudio's argument that to gain information on us, they need to supply it. Mere BS I suspect. Who knows?

There is a level of truth in that.

The Credit Reference Agencies work on the principle that you can only have access to the same level of data that you in turn share back to them. In other words, in order to be able to access information on credit accounts on credit files you have to be a sharer of that level of information back.

Now as far as I am aware that applies on a general basis not a personal one, in that to check your credit file they do not have to share data specifically on YOU but just share that level of data generally. I will try to check that point with SCOR and the CRAs though, as if true it could mean that Erudio do NOT need to share everyone's data if they legitimately share a subset of borrowers.

Secondly there is the question of on what company level the data sharing push and pull applies? Arrow Global share data, and I think so do other of the companies in the Erudio mix, so do Erudio need to share our date in order to have reciprocal access? Or could they have it anyway under the auspices of their overlords/partners/parent companies? Again, think some enquiries are in order.

erudioed

BaffledByErudio wrote: »

But I do, personally, interpret the passing of data to CRAs info on Arrow's FAQs to mean a totally different thing to the suitably amended FAQs provided for we little Erudions!
Basically, Arrow say, in a nutshell, to Arrow debtors, 'Default on a debt we've bought, we could potentially damage your credit file by informing CRAs' Standard practice I'd assume in the debt collection world. We've all heard the stories.
Yet, tailored for our individual needs, as mortgage-style loan-holders, we're told that they need to inform CRAs so as to enable a flow of information about us, to ensure we're not telling porky pies about our means to stump up money. Yet we're constantly reminded it could 'positively' affect our records.
Erudio must know the gravitas of a CRA threat. Their parent company

For sure they know the threat, thats why a page and a third, under the heading WARNING below our deferment form signature, is dedictaed to such info.
I also add that they have now admitted to trading our info with CRAs so that they can get info from CRAs, which i believe takes things into new territory on this CRA debate. My personal information isnt a commodity for trade by these cutthroats, at least i seem to recall being very assured the information i provided to SLC would be safe all those years ago. They say in one breath the info is being passed on to promote responsible lending, then in the next it is to trade info with CRAs. 2 such diverse reasons in almost the same breath by Zach Lewy has the smell of bull**** around it, with one providing the justification for the other. However, now he has admitted to trading our info, does that not take things to a different level?
Maybe i can ask him, or Capita's representative, that and other questions if he agrees to come on these forums and answer questions.


Also, if you want to similar pages, check out Honours Student Loans, also owned by this bunch of clowns behind Erudio. Such a connection suggests to me why Zach Lewy's recent teething theory problems is rubbish, HSL was born in 1999. If they havent had time to get a simple software programme devised for this exact situation, then they arent fit for purpose.
531, is that a 1000% lie...but i never did study maths!

rizla_king

Some tests for any potential Erudio rep.

• Admit that legally you do not have to use their forms in order to be eligible to defer. A letter with the required evidence is legally sound.
• Admit that it is not a legal condition of deferment that you have a direct debt it place. Nor is a breach of the agreement that entitles them to refuse deferment or call in the loan.
• Admit that a P60 is not required. 3 months wage slips is all is needed.

If the rep fails on ANY of those or tells the usual lies then we will know we won't be able to believe one word they say.

.

erudioed

After taking a bit of time to digest the new info, I have a few thoughts on the recent article on MSE about Arrow's concessions. Firstly, if they are going to redesign the deferment forms and highlight what is mandatory and what is not, does it make any difference whatsoever. They have already gotten that info from many of us, so would not need it restating anyway...they already have that information. However, will they delete that information that they blackmailed us into providing or re-ask us if we would mind them using it. Either way, it has been attained deceitfully, so they should either not use it and delete it out of respect, or ask us to submit it if we wish to.
Secondly, and although its good they have come clean(er) about how many got their bank accounts raided, why havent they compensated everyone for the inconvenience if they are truly sorry, as a token gesture. After all, with so much experience of such things via Honours Student Loans for many years, you would have thought software blocking funds being taken would be the one failsafe they would have prioritised. The after knowing so many were being taken, why couldnt they stop it sooner. After all Zack Lewy stated on BBC radio that they look at the statistics every night, so how can they not spot bank deposits very easily in their accounts. Surely the statistic for how much money they have taken on a given day is the bottom line? One can only draw 1 or 3 answers:
A) It was just a starter company's error
They arent fit for purpose
C) They lied and have their own reasons for doing so

Thirdly, concerning poor customer service. I think it is clear that many of us feel deliberately confused and told things that just arent true. The kinds of things debt collectors are reknown for. However, here is their rather contemptful and lay the blame elsewhere answer in the MSE article:
Erudio outsources the servicing of its loans to Capita. It says poor customer service from its helpline is down to the fact it sent out a lot of letters about the sale, deferments, and direct debits in a short period of time, leading to a lot of people getting in touch.
It adds this was exacerbated by students who hadn't kept their addresses up to date, so had not received any letters and were confused about what was happening.



So, none of the blame is on a lack of trained staff or weak structure from their end. The conflicting answers i was given would have been given even if they werent busy. The staff didnt know what hit them and they were chronically undertrained by Capita/Arrow.


We could all pick holes in these things but where do they really admit blame for any of what they have put us all through. There is an acknowledgement by them of being overwhelmed by the workload but absolutely no real apology from them to us for the frontier attitude they have approached us all with, or the total shambles of their procedures at their end. No apology, no voluntary refunds, shock at the fuss, these are not things i accept as an apology to move things forward. Only by fully accepting the blame and giving something back can they be taken seriously. All they are doing right now is fighting the fire and trying to stop the negative brand publicity, something that must be galling as Mr Lewy and his counterpart Tom Drury recently picked up an award for Best Business Products and Services. In the words of the judge on the night, "Anthony Preston praised the pair for having built the business, which has 100 staff, from scratch and developing "their own form of business alchemy, where they take bad debt and turn it into gold.""
Bad debt indeed, thats all we are to them!



See happy picture of them accepting the award:

http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/483912-high-fives-as-e-amp-y-honours-entrepreneurs.html

anna2007

I'm gathering the supporting documents for sending in with my deferment application and will be submitting bank statements from the last 3 months - only because Erudio have insisted on these from others, so thought I might as well send them now.

Can anyone offer advice on how much detail to show on the bank statements? I was going to black out all transactions and balances, other than the Child Benefit and CTC payments coming in from HMRC, but will Erudio want to see all credit entries on the statements, e.g. to show that my husband hasn't paid any money into my account?

If they need to see all credit entries, I have a few payments from Paypal from personal items sold on Ebay - do I need to send print-outs from Paypal to show this was the source, rather than something else that might be classed as income?

Can't believe how much worry this is causing - completely stressed out in case I get it wrong!

erudioed

According to the BBC on October 31st, 2013:
"A list of the owners of "shell" companies where firms keep money offshore to avoid tax will be published to discourage tax evasion, David Cameron has announced."
This must have sent shock waves to companies like:
"Arrow Global Guernsey Limited
Registered Number: 49547
Consumer Credit Act Licence Number: 622921
Data Protection Act Notification Number: Z1552619
Arrow Global Guernsey Limited is registered in Guernsey.
Registered Office:
La Plaiderie House
La Plaiderie
St Peter Port
Guernsey GY1 1WG
Arrow Global Guernsey Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority for accounts formed under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (as amended). It is registered on the Financial Services Register under registration number 622921."
Shock waves because they were already tendering for the Student Loans portfolio, the sale of which was soon to be announced. Not only that, but the company they had proposed as its Shell company for the sale was set up and controlled by The Wilmington Trust, which on its website states:
"Through our offices in the Channel Islands, we provide local management, administrative, and trust services for entities domiciled in the Channel Islands"
One would assume that set up a partnership between both of the above entities, and would put under threat the chance of not winning the sale of this loan portfolio, especially as the PM himself was on the warpath:
"This cloak of secrecy has fuelled all manner of questionable practice and downright illegality," he said.
"And illegality that is bad for Britain's economy too - as people evade their taxes through untraceable trails of paperwork.
He said the practice held back tax cuts for business as a whole: "To keep corporate taxes low, you've got to keep corporate taxes coming in. As I've put it, no tax base - no low tax case."
So, with that in mind, to some it must have been rather concerning when less than 1 month later after conducting its own due diligence test, The Department of Business Innovation and Skills awarded Erudio Student Loans Ltd the £160 million student loan sale, going in the face of the PM's new policy direction.
However, the PM had another concern about shell companies, which maybe this consortium of investors would not cross. The BBC noted:
The prime minister said making the register public would make it easier for firms and developing countries to know who they were doing business with.
Speaking at the Open Government Partnership summit in London, Mr Cameron said a small minority of companies have hidden their business dealings in a "complex web of shell companies" for too long.
However, only after being uncovered on these very forums, has it recently been admitted by all involved, including BIS, that Erudio always is just a shell company. Not in any previous BIS press releases, nor in the correspondences sent out to ex-students does the name Capita or its subsidiary Ventura appear, the very company, as it turns, who is processing all the deferment forms and taking all phone calls.
As such, one can only conclude that BIS's due diligence test must have gone directly against David Cameron's own personal policy direction when selling these Student Loans. With both of the worrying criteria seemingly in play on this issue, the dodgy Channel Island company connections and lack of clarity about who the ex-students were dealing with, surely it is time for someone such as David Willetts MP, to come out of the shadows and reveal the results of BIS's due diligence test and account for how and why he has unleashed this company on 45,000 odd ex-students who did nothing wrong, broke no agreements, fullfilled their end of the Student Loan agreement and always kept in touch with The Student Loans Company for the last 16 or so years. The only thing they have seemingly done wrong is not having earned enough money to start paying back their student loans. Surely, targetting the less wealthy amongst us, by setting the intellectual capitalist on to such ex-students is nothing more than bullying, turning those vultures who buy debt onto the minions, allowing them to invasively enter their lives and turn them upside down. After all, when has the buying and selling of debt every caused any problems, and who are the groups who end up suffering the most when that does happen? Answers on a postcard.

BaffledByErudio

Hello,
I've just come home from a family meal where my loans situation was pretty much the main talking point.
In fact I think they're sick of me talking about it.
My cousin, who is a detective constable no less, lol (he studied law - criminal law though) advised me that DCAs are a regular talking point in police stations because people constantly claim they are being harassed and ring the police.
He says that while (as he understood my conversation) Arrow Global is a parent company of Erudio, it probably can't use its DCA muscle until an Erudio customer has flagrantly breached loan terms. He wasn't sure on the CRA reporting situation, but said it's definitely worth running it past a solicitor because it's an operational change and while not a T&Cs change, we probably should have been told this could happen.
Back to the flagrant abuse of loan terms. This would be trying to avoid payment while over the income threshold [and unfortunately, they can seemingly take some state benefits into account, but again that's an 'operational' change].
Ignoring requests for information. Legally, we still have to confirm who we are and how much we earn if we need to defer.
Moving abroad and not notifying Erudio if the bank details we gave them are no longer active.
My cousin said he has even heard of cases where former students who have been legally allowed to defer since the 90s have been nonchalant and haven't even regarded the loan as a debt and have moved house several times, whilst seriously in default, without ever deferring!
But, for those of us who are legally below the threshold, until Erudio tries to prove otherwise, we should be OK. Give or take our knackered or 'positively amended' credit reports!

cluelessfish

finally got my notice of assignment. late delivery aside the dates on slc cover letter and notice dont match up with my normal deferment stuff

12th feb normal deferment letter/application sent to old address.filled in, including change of address, signed dated 10th march. I know a little late but this has never been issue before and still a month before deferment runs out

17th march deferment accepted letter form slc sent to new address. That was quick processed deferment, changed address and sent response in one week.

27th march notice of assignment with cover letter form slc sent to old address? Notice of assignment from erudio says i am deferred and they will send new form before deferment period runs out.

10th April erudio take money from my account without warning.

Are these mismatched dates, addresses not proof that someone is sending letters which may not be accurate at the time of writting or does it all fall under the same we messed everything up during the transfer excuse?

rizla_king

As you were deferred before the assignment by SLC claim the DD payment back under the DD guarantee. Erudio should not have taken it.

cluelessfish

already got money back. the dates above are from the letters when they were created and not when i received them. the notice of assignment has only arrived in the last week at my old address.even if i had received it earlier it had still been sent to wrong address.I had completed my deferment with change of address and received deferment confirmation at my new address dated 17th march from slc. The notice of assignment from erudio and cover letter from slc are both dated 27th march and have old address. The cover letter states that the loans were transferred on the 10th march thats before they(slc) would have received my deferment form.
This leads to the following questions

If slc have my correct address on the 17th why not on 27th?

If slc have processed my deferment after transferring loans they have informed me and honours student loans (they have some of my loans from the first sell off) but some how forgot about erudio?

If erudio were working with info from 10th march why did they not send me one of their new deferment forms or inform me they were taking money before my deferment ran out?