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, 9:32 PM
    ERUDIO student loans help 16th Mar 14 at 9:32 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 185
    • fermi
    • By fermi 17th Mar 15, 11:57 AM
    • 39,669 Posts
    • 47,650 Thanks
    fermi
    Made no reference either way.

    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 17th Mar 15, 12:02 PM
    • 39,669 Posts
    • 47,650 Thanks
    fermi
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/6d4byikpryulycm/Deferments%20Reference%20Pack%20V13%20Redacted.pdf ?dl=0
    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
    • thin king
    • By thin king 17th Mar 15, 12:58 PM
    • 18 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    thin king
    Thanks for all the posts - the interest earned alone takes me over the threshold (when combined with earnings - I was very close anyway!) so I will be liable for repayment. Its been along time coming but to be honest in some strange way I will be glad to not have the stress of trying to obtain a deferment.
    • dizzybuff
    • By dizzybuff 17th Mar 15, 1:35 PM
    • 1,396 Posts
    • 2,302 Thanks
    dizzybuff
    Well my adjudicator failed to do one thing r calculate my earnings as apparently it's not part of her job. Her manager agreed. I've taken it all the way to the independent assessor. If they had answered that one question themselves instead of asking erudio I wouldn't have got in arrears. I've now agreed with the ombasmans decision and opened another complaint with Erudio as I have extra evidence. So awaiting on the ia and erudio. Sigh
    ONE HOUSE , DS+ DD Missymoo Living a day at a time and getting through this mess you have created.
    One day life will have no choice but to be nice to me
    • gardenia101
    • By gardenia101 17th Mar 15, 1:36 PM
    • 578 Posts
    • 2,802 Thanks
    gardenia101
    Made no reference either way.

    Originally posted by fermi
    Sorry Fermi if I'm being thick (wouldn't be the first time ) but are you saying that SLC didn't make a reference either way regarding the inclusion of inheritances as income?

    If so, I'm not sure I follow. I thought that as inheritances themselves (i.e. the capital) were non-taxable due to double taxation rules, then aren't SLC saying to exclude them (as non-taxable payments)?

    Although I tried that argument with child maintenance - should be excluded as non-taxable under double taxation rules, but does seem to count as income for SL reasons.


    That's the one - thanks Fermi.

    I can't find any specific mention of inheritance in it though. Or child maintenance as apposed to maintenance.

    Thanks for all the posts - the interest earned alone takes me over the threshold (when combined with earnings - I was very close anyway!) so I will be liable for repayment. Its been along time coming but to be honest in some strange way I will be glad to not have the stress of trying to obtain a deferment.
    Originally posted by thin king
    I do envy you not having to deal with Erudio & all it entails. Its not fun.
    And I find that looking back at you gives a better view, a better view...
    • fermi
    • By fermi 17th Mar 15, 1:39 PM
    • 39,669 Posts
    • 47,650 Thanks
    fermi
    I would say an inheritance is capital not income so should not be declared to Erudio.

    Quite frankly it's none of their business.
    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
    • gardenia101
    • By gardenia101 17th Mar 15, 2:33 PM
    • 578 Posts
    • 2,802 Thanks
    gardenia101
    Well my adjudicator failed to do one thing r calculate my earnings as apparently it's not part of her job. Her manager agreed. I've taken it all the way to the independent assessor. If they had answered that one question themselves instead of asking erudio I wouldn't have got in arrears. I've now agreed with the ombasmans decision and opened another complaint with Erudio as I have extra evidence. So awaiting on the ia and erudio. Sigh
    Originally posted by dizzybuff
    Oh Dizzybuff, it's such s saga, isn't it. I hope Erudio reply to your complaint more quickly than my latest. They've ignored 2 emails & 2 letters (sent signed for) & I expect if I rang them, they'd deny all knowledge of what has happened to those letters between someone signing for them & now. The only excuse I haven't heard is that someone other than one of their employees must have signed for that letter

    Don't really want to ring them though - they'll say one thing then not give the transcript/copy of that call to FOS when FOS request it to prove my side of events - but that seems to be another thing that my adjudicator can't do anything about either. I did stupidly assume that if there was a call between me & Erudio, then there would be a record of that call that Erudio would have to produce - silly me.

    Maybe they're ignoring me because I'm in deferment? Although I'd expect any other company to still communicate with me when I raise complaints.
    And I find that looking back at you gives a better view, a better view...
  • Sameboattogether
    I spoke to them last week & calls are most definitely recorded as my call had to be paused with a few key presses from them and then restart of recording again, after payment was given to the csr, with a few more key presses!! They made sure I knew and was very quick to restart recording before any further chatter/ questions. So using your phone bill for no / time / date / length of call proof Fos surely will have to force Erudio to find recording ?.....?? I expect they will claim deleted by then but I think they keep the calls for ages to cover themselves, in reality, tbh. And supposedly for our benefit .....
    • Lungboy
    • By Lungboy 17th Mar 15, 3:13 PM
    • 1,731 Posts
    • 1,912 Thanks
    Lungboy
    It's perfectly legal for you to record the call too, as long as you inform them.
    • Former MSE Paloma
    • By Former MSE Paloma 17th Mar 15, 5:01 PM
    • 526 Posts
    • 245 Thanks
    Former MSE Paloma
    MSE News: Received a letter from Erudio quoting outdated regulations? Let us know
    A graduate has reported receiving a letter from student loans provider Erudio, which quoted incorrect regulations ...

    Read the full story:

    Received a letter from Erudio quoting outdated regulations? Let us know




    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.

    • gardenia101
    • By gardenia101 17th Mar 15, 6:08 PM
    • 578 Posts
    • 2,802 Thanks
    gardenia101
    I spoke to them last week & calls are most definitely recorded as my call had to be paused with a few key presses from them and then restart of recording again, after payment was given to the csr, with a few more key presses!! They made sure I knew and was very quick to restart recording before any further chatter/ questions. So using your phone bill for no / time / date / length of call proof Fos surely will have to force Erudio to find recording ?.....?? I expect they will claim deleted by then but I think they keep the calls for ages to cover themselves, in reality, tbh. And supposedly for our benefit .....
    Originally posted by Sameboattogether
    Oh I know they do record calls - when I was told I had to make a payment by c/c then I went through the same explanation with their staff member, & had the odd clicks & noises when the recording started again.

    I also had a bizarre chat about how they'd have to record my c/c details to be able to process my refund.

    There was a particular call that I assumed FOS would get, since they said they we're asking for ALL info regarding my case. But that call didn't appear, so I'm hoping FOS will chase it up. Again.

    It's perfectly legal for you to record the call too, as long as you inform them.
    Originally posted by Lungboy
    Missed that boat, sadly. All in writing now I'm older & wiser.

    A graduate has reported receiving a letter from student loans provider Erudio, which quoted incorrect regulations ...

    Read the full story:

    Received a letter from Erudio quoting outdated regulations? Let us know




    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.

    Originally posted by MSE Paloma
    I'm wondering if this is about me or another poor soul? I know I'm not the only one to get such a letter. Would MSE email me to ask my permission to use me as a story?

    Clicking on the link takes me to a longer version of the story on the main MSE site, yet clicking on a link from that page (where it says to comment/discuss) this just takes me back to the same page with the longer story - sums up beautifully how anything to do with Erudio has us going round in circles but I thought it would link to a forum thread. Puzzled.
    And I find that looking back at you gives a better view, a better view...
    • gardenia101
    • By gardenia101 17th Mar 15, 6:18 PM
    • 578 Posts
    • 2,802 Thanks
    gardenia101
    And I won't be getting any clarifications from FOS for some time as my adjudicator is going on holiday for almost 3 weeks. Will post updates when I get more answers.

    Thankfully my deadline to accept/escalate my complaint of this week will be extended as expected - I'll find out by how long when shes gets back. Gives me a few more weeks to not hear from Erudio, & for them to not supply the large print documents that shes asked them to send to both of us

    When will it end? I'm hoping by 50, but Erudio have ignored my request to confirm the date my loans will be wiped off (assuming I'll still be deferred at 50, which is very likely). Have they replied?
    And I find that looking back at you gives a better view, a better view...
    • fermi
    • By fermi 17th Mar 15, 6:20 PM
    • 39,669 Posts
    • 47,650 Thanks
    fermi
    Link in the article has been sorted now, so should point here
    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 17th Mar 15, 6:34 PM
    • 655 Posts
    • 935 Thanks
    erudioed
    gardenia101: Tell everyone you know to contact the author. The more the merrier.
    They even told MSE they thought the 1997 regs apply in their response. Its such a catastrophic gaff, i had to pull my trousers up, they fell down i was laughing so hard. It took BIS to once again set things straight. All the lawyers, all the cash and they cant get the basics right...that sounds about right as most of us already know. I wonder if Erudio quoted these regs in complaint replies that got appealed to the ombudsman, with the ombudsman not picking out the error.
    • gardenia101
    • By gardenia101 17th Mar 15, 6:34 PM
    • 578 Posts
    • 2,802 Thanks
    gardenia101
    Link in the article has been sorted now, so should point here
    Originally posted by fermi
    You're right - darn, you're good
    Glad it wasn't just me
    And I find that looking back at you gives a better view, a better view...
    • gardenia101
    • By gardenia101 17th Mar 15, 6:38 PM
    • 578 Posts
    • 2,802 Thanks
    gardenia101
    gardenia101: Tell everyone you know to contact the author. The more the merrier.
    They even told MSE they thought the 1997 regs apply in their response. Its such a catastrophic gaff, i had to pull my trousers up, they fell down i was laughing so hard. It took BIS to once again set things straight. All the lawyers, all the cash and they cant get the basics right...that sounds about right as most of us already know. I wonder if Erudio quoted these regs in complaint replies that got appealed to the ombudsman, with the ombudsman not picking out the error.
    Originally posted by erudioed
    That was one of the points I wanted to clarify with my FOS adjudicator - from what she'd said I got the impression she was reading a different final response letter from Erudio than I was. Will have to wait & see what she says next month.

    It was another poster on here who said they'd had a letter where Erudio had quoted the wrong regs - will look for that post.
    And I find that looking back at you gives a better view, a better view...
    • fermi
    • By fermi 17th Mar 15, 6:40 PM
    • 39,669 Posts
    • 47,650 Thanks
    fermi
    evilsheep and BorderReiver14 on this thread are 2 more with those letters I think?
    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
    • gardenia101
    • By gardenia101 17th Mar 15, 6:47 PM
    • 578 Posts
    • 2,802 Thanks
    gardenia101
    evilsheep and BorderReiver14 on this thread are 2 more with those letters I think?
    Originally posted by fermi
    Found Evilsheep's post (#3366) so that's a yes. Fermi, you're too quick for me
    And I find that looking back at you gives a better view, a better view...
    • Mr McGuffin
    • By Mr McGuffin 17th Mar 15, 8:20 PM
    • 91 Posts
    • 313 Thanks
    Mr McGuffin
    Yes, certainly, me too. Erudio quoted the revoked 1997 regulations in its final response to my complaints.

    I think the point about this is not to do with quoting the 1997 deferment threshold. The revoked regulations are cited as a response to objections to its deferment application form, not as notice of the deferment threshold.

    It is ridiculous to suggest this is an error, and the purpose for the quotation of these regulations over those from 1998 is obvious.

    It better suits the purpose of Erudio to quote the 1997 line 'satisfies the loans administrator' in relation to deferment than the correct 1998 definition 'he can show.'

    This has been gone through in some detail on here, by myself included. I have posted all this before, but a starting point to understand what the the Labour government did with these loans in 1997-98 is the Explanatory Note to the 1998 Regulations and the 1997 explanations and proposals from Stephen Byers and Kim Howells here:

    http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1997/jul/21/education-student-loans-bill

    Anyone reading this today will notice that the proposed 'freezing' 'without change' in practice involved changes to the previous drafting of the deferment terms.

    The 1998 regulations were intended to define the terms of all preceding loan agreements prior to sale to the private sector, and as I understand it to do so in accordance with the original intentions and parliamentary approval for the loans.

    Copies of the original proposals for the loan scheme as presented to Parliament are in the House of Commons Library here:

    Dep 5749
    Hardcopy only
    28-02-1990
    Commons Department of Education and Science
    Top-up loans: rules & procedures.
    DES. 1990.
    Corporate Author: Department of Education and Science

    DEP 5849
    Hardcopy only
    28-03-1990
    Commons Department of Education and Science
    Top-up loans: rules and procedures.
    DES. 1990.
    Corporate Author: Department of Education and Science

    It is a simple 8 page document and makes clear how these loans
    were originally conceived.

    The mechanism
    proposed for 'verification' of income for deferment was not adopted when the regulations were made later in the year. This is the context for the confirmation in the 19 June 1990 written answer by Robert Jackson:

    'The terms and conditions of a loan agreement will not authorise the Student Loans Company to investigate borrowers' incomes through their employers or banks.'


    There is a question to BIS about this in a recent FOI request that I recommend reading:

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...udent_loans_12

    The answer does not seem conclusive and satisfactory to me.

    Last edited by Mr McGuffin; 17-03-2015 at 9:09 PM.
    • Mr McGuffin
    • By Mr McGuffin 17th Mar 15, 8:30 PM
    • 91 Posts
    • 313 Thanks
    Mr McGuffin
    A different point, but as I understand it the Education (Student Loans) Act 1998 and Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1998 were themselves immediately repealed by the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998.

    A lawyer would have to interpret this correctly for sure, but as I understand it this Act then provided for the making of 'transitional arrangements' in relation to the Education (Student Loans) Act 1990. This appears to me to be the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998 (Commencement No. 2 and Transitional Provisions) Order 1998.

    Transitional and saving provisions
    3.

    —(1) The repeals of the 1990, 1996 and 1998 Acts shall not affect the continued operation of the provisions of those Acts or of any subordinate legislation made or to be made under them with respect to, or otherwise in connection with:

    (a) loans made under the 1990 Act before the coming into force of the repeals of those Acts;

    (b) the making of loans to any student who attends any course referred to in article 4; or

    (c) loans made to any such student.

    (2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1), the repeals of the 1990, 1996 and 1998 Acts shall not affect the continued operation of any such provisions relating to any of the following functions:

    (a) the making of subordinate legislation;

    (b) the assignment of public sector loans under section 1A of the 1990 Act;

    (c) the making of arrangements (including arrangements which provide for the making of payments of any specified description)

    in connection with such an assignment.

    Do correct me if anyone understands this to be mistaken.

    Is it certain that section 42 of the Teaching and Higher Education Act 1998 cannot apply to these loans?:

    (6) Any order or regulations under this Act may make different provision for different cases, circumstances or areas and may contain such incidental, supplemental, saving or transitional provisions as the Secretary of State thinks fit.

    (8) Nothing in this Act shall be read as affecting the generality of subsection (6).


    Last edited by Mr McGuffin; 17-03-2015 at 9:32 PM.
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

101Posts Today

2,229Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Snap post #BBCOurNextPM poll: Who do you think did best. (I had to have two in one category, so I picked randoml? https://t.co/gYTNBBn3SP

  • Emily Maitliss being v mean to Boris using his own past quotes against him on Heathrow, having an election when lea? https://t.co/4baNAlmMid

  • Wow - impressive performance from the 15 year old climate change activist. Not sure I'd have had such confidence when still at school.

  • Follow Martin