Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    TazFrank1
    ERUDIO student loans help
    • #1
    • 16th Mar 14, 10:32 PM
    ERUDIO student loans help 16th Mar 14 at 10:32 PM
    HI,

    My student loan has recently been sold to erudio student loans company. I currently defer my loan as I am below the salary threshold to pay it back. The letter states that erudio will supply details of my loan to credit rating agencies, something that has never been done before. There have never been any details of my student loan on my credit file. Will this adversely effect my credit score?? I know I am right to defer as I do not earn enough to start paying it back, however, I am worried that a 10k student loan debt that has not been paid off can only be a bad thing for my credit score

    thanks
Page 28
    • anna2007
    • By anna2007 9th May 14, 11:07 AM
    • 1,182 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    anna2007
    For anyone unhappy with Erudio passing your deferred loan details onto the credit reference agencies - I came across this yesterday when looking at the Data Protection Act 1998:

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/schedule/15/paragraph/10


    10. Schedule 2 to the Education (Student Loans) Act 1990 (loans for students) so far as that Schedule continues in force shall have effect as if the reference in paragraph 4(2) to the Data Protection Act 1984 were a reference to this Act.

    I think this means that you have the more extensive protections given under the 1998 Act, rather than the 1984 Act originally referred to. This is good news, because Erudio have to obtain your consent before they can pass on your loan details to the CRA's (obviously why they have sneakily added the fair processing notice to the deferment form, to try and obtain this consent). This is a condition of processing laid down in the 1998 Act, there's more info here on the Information Commissioner's Office website here:

    http://ico.org.uk/for_organisations/data_protection/the_guide/conditions_for_processing#consent

    This effectively means that Erudio are in breach of the loan agreement if they insist on passing your details on when you haven't consented to it - more grounds for complaint to the FOS/FCA!
    • anna2007
    • By anna2007 9th May 14, 12:37 PM
    • 1,182 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    anna2007
    Those terms with that wording were all from the 1993 to 1997 regulations, all of which have been revoked and do not now apply to any loan no matter what date it was taken out.The regulations had to be revoked completely and remade each year to change the deferment threshold, meaning that it was only ever the current set that applied to ALL loans.

    The final current regulations for the mortgage style loans are the 1998 ones that set the threshold differently, and so have never been revoked and remain in force.

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1998/211/schedule/2/paragraph/9/made
    Originally posted by rizla king
    Accepted (I even said the original Act was repealed in 1998!), I was linking to the original Act and regulations in case it helped the person who thought the quote was from a term of the loan agreement.

    If it helps, there's a list of all changes affecting the 1990 Act here:
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/changes/affected/ukpga/1990/6
    • anna2007
    • By anna2007 9th May 14, 1:14 PM
    • 1,182 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    anna2007
    Yes but also under the terms only certain breaches entitle them to refuse deferment or demand the loan back in full.

    Not maintaining a DD is not a breach that allows them to do that. That clause does not have the teeth you think it does.

    Which is why they are deciding with people that they can't insist on it.
    Originally posted by rizla king
    Again, I agree with you! I never said that I thought the clause had teeth (quite the opposite), only that I think Erudio will claim that it does.

    My understanding of the terms is that they can require immediate payment of the whole loan if you fail to make a repayment required under the loan agreement. I suppose the best way to ensure this never happens is to have the DD set up.

    I'm more thinking ahead to what happens when these loans qualify for cancellation (Erudio don't have much choice but to defer the loans in the meantime, if you can prove your income's below the threshold, although this won't stop them making the whole deferment process a nightmare compared to SLC). The terms state something like the loans will be cancelled after the 25 years/age 50 so long as you're not in breach of ANY obligation to them. Maybe I'm being paranoid or over-thinking things, but I simply don't trust Erudio, I think they're trying to create an obligation for us to have a DD set up by adding that statement to the DD form, which they'll use against us if the loans reach the stage of being eligible for cancellation.

    Hope that explains where I'm coming from with this, I completely agree with you on the point of the DD (or lack of) having no impact on your rights to defer.
    Last edited by anna2007; 09-05-2014 at 1:35 PM. Reason: Add additional point
    • rizla king
    • By rizla king 9th May 14, 1:26 PM
    • 2,843 Posts
    • 1,903 Thanks
    rizla king
    Undoubtedly that is what they hope people will think. It's clearly not true from the agreement terms though.

    If Erudio could be trusted with the direct debit details than I don't think it would be an issue. Unfortunately they've shown that they can't be trusted in the slightest. Yes you can claim payments back but sometimes you can't always get that done immediately even when the DD rules say it should be, and in the meantime the money swiped from some people's accounts can leave up a sh!t creak without a paddle.

    In the end if you are deferred or entitled to defer then there is no need to have a DD in place. Or if you are due to pay then you can set one up or pay direct. No need for one to be permanently in place.
    • rizla king
    • By rizla king 9th May 14, 1:47 PM
    • 2,843 Posts
    • 1,903 Thanks
    rizla king
    Same applies to cancellation though. The loan terms and regs are clear. As long as you are not behind with payments then you are entitled to have them cancelled at the appropriate time.
  • CloudsinSky
    Education (Student Loans Act) 1990 (repealed in March 1998):
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/6/section/1/enacted

    The Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1990:
    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1990/1401/contents/made
    Originally posted by anna2007
    I don't see how it matters where the terms are - whether in the regulations or credit agreement. Either way, you'd expect at the time you took out your loan (in many or most cases, as a naieve teenager) that whatever official paperwork you were given at the time, formed your contract. Any subsequent change to that is mis-selling, surely?

    On this forum, none of us seem to be totally clear where we stand, and there is no way any of us would trust Erudio to inform us impartially, of course. So who else can tell us? Why should any of us have to seek legal advice. The Government - BIS, I guess, should be giving us a lot more information to remove all doubt. The information they provide should be impartial (I don't know the process of how that could happen. Based on information already provided to some of us from BIS, it would not be impartial. So they would have to demonstrate to us that it could be given impartially somehow).
    • Former MSE Helen
    • By Former MSE Helen 9th May 14, 6:03 PM
    • 2,324 Posts
    • 971 Thanks
    Former MSE Helen
    MSE News: Erudio Student Loans: 500 people had mistakenly taken from accounts
    Erudio Student Loans has admitted over 500 people have mistakenly had money taken from their accounts Ė not 50...

    Read the full story:

    Erudio Student Loans: 500 people had mistakenly taken from accounts




    Click reply below to discuss. If you havenít already, join the forum to reply. If you arenít sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

    • anna2007
    • By anna2007 9th May 14, 10:11 PM
    • 1,182 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    anna2007
    @ MSE Helen, thanks for the update to the article.

    Something doesn't add up with the number of deferred borrowers affected by this - your article says it's 45,000, but the Government's press release from last November on the loan sale states the loans are owed by around a quarter of a million borrowers, 46% of whom are deferring - so 115,000 - quite a discrepancy.

    The press release also goes on to say that "Approximately 1 million borrowers were retained by the SLC following the previous sales and 69% of those have fully repaid their debt", which leaves 310,000 borrowers with outstanding debt, so perhaps even the government don't know the true figure... maybe you could check with your source on the number of deferred borrowers whose loans were sold, as it looks like it's far higher than the article suggests? Press release here:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/sale-of-mortgage-style-student-loan-book-completed

    I've PM'd you about a couple of other issues, would really appreciate it if you could have a read and let me know what you think, thanks
    • BaffledByErudio
    • By BaffledByErudio 10th May 14, 12:39 AM
    • 105 Posts
    • 151 Thanks
    BaffledByErudio
    Just been perusing Arrow Global's FAQs page. I'd not looked at it before, maybe others have and if I've missed their post(s), apologies.
    Interestingly (and I could be wrong. It's just opinion) the text/format within it is very, very similar to that of the FAQs page on Erudio's site.
    Clearly, it's been sub-edited and re-sculpted for Erudio, but the style [blue text - click it and the drop-down elaboration appears] is quintessentially the same. I'd even go so far as to imagine the same web software was used and the same IT bods created it!
    And there are a couple of fascinating little tit-bits on there too. As I'm a new forum member (although it now feels like I joined in 1994 - wish I had, wouldn't have taken the flipping loan out with such hindsight), I probably can't link to the page. But it is simply Arrow's UK site, and the FAQs page.
    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?
    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 has been using it and openly admits so on its website!
    One final note. A weird thing on the actual Erudio FAQs page.
    There are two questions relating to deferment. One is; 'Will I still be able to defer?' The other asks what will happen if the loan holder is currently in a period of deferment instated by SLC. The answer given by Erudio to both questions is identical and purely summarises how one should go about the deferment process. It doesn't answer the second question!
    I will again reiterate my key point. I do not blame Erudio or Arrow Global for ANY of this. They are debt collectors and a private operation with profit at the forefront of their actions.
    The government needs to end its silence and speak to those of us enduring this farce that even the Chuckle Brothers would stand and marvel at!
    • anna2007
    • By anna2007 10th May 14, 12:42 AM
    • 1,182 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    anna2007
    I don't see how it matters where the terms are - whether in the regulations or credit agreement. Either way, you'd expect at the time you took out your loan (in many or most cases, as a naieve teenager) that whatever official paperwork you were given at the time, formed your contract. Any subsequent change to that is mis-selling, surely?

    On this forum, none of us seem to be totally clear where we stand, and there is no way any of us would trust Erudio to inform us impartially, of course. So who else can tell us? Why should any of us have to seek legal advice. The Government - BIS, I guess, should be giving us a lot more information to remove all doubt. The information they provide should be impartial (I don't know the process of how that could happen. Based on information already provided to some of us from BIS, it would not be impartial. So they would have to demonstrate to us that it could be given impartially somehow).
    Originally posted by CloudsinSky
    The only one I would trust to be impartial in our situation is the ombudsman. I've only brought two cases to an ombudsman (both mobile phone companies, two separate ADR schemes), both found against the company, I thought both were completely impartial. The first case was on my ownsome, the second was with huge support from other people on the MSE forum last year. I would never take a complaint to these guys for the sake of it (because it takes up a silly amount of your free time), but if it feels like they're taking the pee, then it's time to dig your heels in and fight.

    Think about the potential sale of the later student loans.(with their loose terms).. that seems scary, as millions of people will be in the same situation as our wee minority are in now. Sadly, I'm old enough to remember the Poll Tax being trialled in Scotland in a similar guinea-pig style, that hardly ended well for Maggie and her minions... another legacy of the Tories that didn't turn out too good then.

    What really gets me is that our Government walked into this deal with their eyes wide open. They knew exactly the beast they were dealing with - a DCA who give not a sh!t about the customer or their circumstances. It makes sense for a DCA to take over defaulters, that's their job, but why would they include deferred loans... maybe because they're worth near to half a million and made the deal that bit sweeter for Erudio. Fed to the CRA wolves for the sake of an education, well thank you so much, but I think I'll use my right to defer, ignore the scare tactics and fight your shoddy tactics with every breath :-P Basterds...
    Last edited by anna2007; 10-05-2014 at 1:20 AM. Reason: Add Basterds, just felt right when reading back
    • fermi
    • By fermi 10th May 14, 5:20 AM
    • 39,669 Posts
    • 47,650 Thanks
    fermi
    Text of the article for the record on this thread.

    Erudio Student Loans has admitted over 500 people have mistakenly had money taken from their accounts – not the 50 it formerly said. All those affected have been refunded, but if you've had money taken and haven't had it back, let us know.

    This week, MoneySavingExpert.com met Zach Lewy, founder and executive director of Arrow Global, which part-owns Erudio. Our meeting followed the major problems that emerged following the Government's sale of pre-1998 mortgage-style loans to Erudio last November.

    See MoneySavingExpert.com's founder Martin Lewis' blog post The Government has sold people out over Erudio student loans for a full round-up of the issues.

    The majority of these issues centre around the some 45,000 former students who took out loans between 1990 and 1998 and currently defer repaying the money, as they fall short of the £28,775 per year earnings threshold.

    The issues occurred despite ministers promising there would be no real change for borrowers when the loans were sold (see the Student Loan Graduates deserve truth MSE News story for more).

    MoneySavingExpert.com has been urging the Government to urgently clear up the confusion for Erudio customers, but despite receiving assurances from his department, Universities and Science Minister David Willetts has yet to provide a comment.

    Here's what Erudio told us on a number of our key concerns. We've also asked it to become a company representative on our forum so it can reply to your questions there. It says it will look into doing this.

    1. Payments being taken when they shouldn't and without notice

    Erudio told us last month that about 50 people whose loans are deferred had mistakenly had repayments taken from their bank account by direct debit (see the Graduates have money taken from accounts despite deferring MSE News story).

    But it has now confirmed that after carrying out a thorough check, there were actually 531 people who had money taken incorrectly. It says this mistake has since been rectified and all those affected have been refunded.

    If you've had money taken from your bank account and you haven't been refunded, please let us know via the forum link below. You should also report it to Erudio. If you don't get a satisfactory response, you can take your complaint to the free Financial Ombudsman Service.

    You can also get a refund from your bank or building society under the Direct Debit Guarantee.

    Customers whose loans were deferred when Erudio bought them from the Student Loans Company's (SLC) don't need to do anything until the end of their deferral period. Deferrals last 12 months before they have to be reviewed, at which point Erudio will send you a deferral form to complete.

    If you don't complete and return this form, Erudio will assume you're no longer eligible to defer and will start collecting loan payments. The SLC has confirmed this is the same process it used.

    2. The form is far more invasive

    When the SLC operated the loans, there was a form to "apply for a deferral of repayment". But now there's an untitled form, which asks far more questions. It's also left many former students confused about what questions are compulsory and whether they will actually get their deferrals.

    Erudio told us it's setting up a new deferral form, which clearly explains what it's for, and which tells customers which questions are compulsory or optional. It says it's working to incorporate all of the feedback received to date and will update the deferment form in due course.

    It will also share this form with MoneySavingExpert.com before it's published, so we can put it to our users and then share this feedback. There's no date yet as to when the form will be updated, but Erudio says it will be this year.

    It adds that customer feedback will also influence changes to its guides.

    3. Erudio is handing over information to credit reference agencies

    The SLC only registered information with credit agencies when someone defaulted, but Erudio is telling credit reference agencies about all those with outstanding loans that are deferred.

    Erudio says it's promoting responsible lending by doing this and that accurate credit reports are important. It also says if it doesn't put data into credit agencies, it can't get any data out of them.

    The Government says the terms and conditions of fixed-term student loans have not changed as a result of their sale to Erudio. But this is obviously a change to the customs and practice of the SLC's dealings with borrowers.

    4. Poor customer service and delays processing deferrals

    We've been inundated with reports of poor customer service from Erudio, as well as of lengthy delays processing deferrals.

    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.

    Erudio says it had extra staff working over the recent bank holidays to catch up on enquiries. It adds deferrals are now being processed much quicker, taking 21 days.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Debt-Free Wannabe, Bankruptcy, Credit Cards and Loans boards. I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly. Any views are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com. Board guides are not moderators. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

    Free/impartial debt advice: National Debtline | StepChange Debt Charity | Find your local CAB

    IVA & fee charging DMP companies: Profits from misery, motivated ONLY by greed
    • fermi
    • By fermi 10th May 14, 5:32 AM
    • 39,669 Posts
    • 47,650 Thanks
    fermi
    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?
    Originally posted by BaffledByErudio
    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.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Debt-Free Wannabe, Bankruptcy, Credit Cards and Loans boards. I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly. Any views are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com. Board guides are not moderators. If you spot an inappropriate or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

    Free/impartial debt advice: National Debtline | StepChange Debt Charity | Find your local CAB

    IVA & fee charging DMP companies: Profits from misery, motivated ONLY by greed
    • erudioed
    • By erudioed 10th May 14, 6:45 AM
    • 665 Posts
    • 938 Thanks
    erudioed
    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
    Originally posted by BaffledByErudio
    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!
    Last edited by erudioed; 10-05-2014 at 6:47 AM. Reason: just saw fermi's post and it is put so much more eloquently
    • rizla king
    • By rizla king 10th May 14, 8:38 AM
    • 2,843 Posts
    • 1,903 Thanks
    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.

    .
    Last edited by rizla king; 10-05-2014 at 8:40 AM.
    • erudioed
    • By erudioed 10th May 14, 3:47 PM
    • 665 Posts
    • 938 Thanks
    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
    B) 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
    Last edited by erudioed; 10-05-2014 at 6:14 PM.
    • anna2007
    • By anna2007 10th May 14, 4:07 PM
    • 1,182 Posts
    • 2,079 Thanks
    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
    • By erudioed 10th May 14, 4:57 PM
    • 665 Posts
    • 938 Thanks
    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
    • By BaffledByErudio 11th May 14, 2:44 AM
    • 105 Posts
    • 151 Thanks
    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
    • By cluelessfish 11th May 14, 2:20 PM
    • 46 Posts
    • 43 Thanks
    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
    • By rizla king 11th May 14, 3:08 PM
    • 2,843 Posts
    • 1,903 Thanks
    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.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

138Posts Today

1,766Users online

Martin's Twitter