MSE News: Refunds for 1990s students after loan company blunder

lavenderhillmob

My husband had a student loan taken out in 1998 - we finally paid it off a couple of years ago largely by monthly direct debit, (with the odd missed payment here and there), within that time we dealt firstly (and in the main) with SLC, then in 2006 it became managed by Thesis Servicing, then in 2008 Link Financial - I've no idea if this was the same company with a name change or a different company entirely. I think the interest rate was 4.4%. Does any of this news apply to our situation?

fermi

It seems it only applies to loans that the actual Student Loan Company kept from 2008 - 2013, as it was the SLC's incorrect arrears statements/letters that were at fault.

If your loan was in the hands of Thesis Servicing then presumably they did not make the errors that SLC did, so nothing is due back.?

james3333

michele-p wrote: »

Sorry, mis typed it, my loan was 1998 (or maybe I'm in denial at how long ago it was), I'm sure I registered an old address at the time instead of my mum and dad, and have since moved many times.

I will try and contact slc tomorrow to see if they have my info.

im in this position too, had one, moved house etc.... how will they track people down?
anyone?

Limerickgirl

Mephistopheles666 wrote: »

Limerickgirl- you might be interested in the following information about how the Direct Debit system works:


As you can see, the company concerned has to inform its customers in advance that money will be taken, including the date, frequency and the exact amount. They are not allowed to just take it willy nilly. Did Screwdio say that they would refund you the money? If that is the case you will have to keep the direct debit open in order for them to do that. However, the worry is that they might just keep on taking money regardless for as long as the direct debit is there. I am wondering if you could get your bank to refund the money that Erudio has taken? Banks are supposed to refund money that was taken in error via the direct debit system. As Erudio did not inform you in advance that they would be taking money and have clearly broken the regulations governing direct debits, IMO a bank ought to be treating it as if it was money taken in error. It might be worth clarifying with your bank whether they can pay you this money back or whether you have to wait for Screwdio to refund it. If your bank is able to refund the money, you should then immediately cancel your direct debit to prevent Erudio taking any more. Unfortunately (as I mentioned above) if it is Erudio's responsibility to refund the money, you will have to keep the direct debit open in order for them to do this.

The Independent has been investigating Erudio, so you might want to get in contact with them. Simon Read, the journalist investing them, is especially interested in hearing from people who have had money taken when it shouldn't have been:
You can find Simon Read on Twitter (@simonnread)

Just to say thank you and let you know that I contacted Simon Read, next it's my bank. I am determined that Erudio will not get away with this!

jerhams

Good Evening Everybody,


Just want to check does this include student loans that were passed on to a company called Honours Student Loans??


As I was in arrears from 2008 till 2011 when I paid off all the loans at the end of 2011.


Hope some one can help?


Kind Regards


J

amethystdreams

I intend to challenge the legality of both the hike in interest rates and the sale of my information. I was not told that my loan could be sold in the future and if I remember correctly was told my interest rate would be .75% above base which 4.4% definitely isn't. I was also told my remaining debt would be written off at 50 years of age ... I've turned 50 and they're still writing to me!
I challenged the SLC in 1997 to prove in court that their insistence on a letter from my husband to confirm what I was saying, was legal, lawful and not discriminatory to women. They LOST! They couldn't prove they weren't being sexist or that they had behaved lawfully in pursuing me. They were ordered by the judge to stop trying to seek repayment as they had failed to prove their case. This hasn't stopped them from writing to me every year, I just treat their correspondence with the same contempt the judge said their solicitor showed towards me.
Just because they are a government body, it doesn't mean they behave in accordance with the law. I intend to challenge the sale of my non existent debt, not to mention my personal data to a third party. I represented myself last time, but think I will need help this time! First stop County Court to get a copy of the judgement in my favour.
Don't accept this without challenging it! If this was a real mortgage then they have breeched so many rules and the SLC is regulated by the FSA.
Good Luck everyone! Don't get angry, get creative and show them what you can do with the education you spent your loan on! ;-)

fermi

The refunds due are for loans that SLC itself still had from 2008 to 2013.

If your loans were with Honors Student Loans or These over that period then they would have have been responsible for the arrears correspondence rather than SLC so the refunds refered to here would not apply to you.

lovemilk

I had student loans in 1995 and 1996. Paid them off in 2007. I've rang SLC and nobody knows about this news article and has heard of this refunding???

I've updated my contact details with them. But am I eligible for this?
Anybody know what specific number to contact?

Thank you.

fermi

As the article says, the errors occurred for loans in arrears between 2008 and 2013, so if you paid yours off in 2007 this has no impact on you.