Following receipt of my first Erudio DAF I took the view of many on these forums that the form was intrusive, an attempt to gain additional consents and unnecessary to apply for a deferment. In December I therefore sent proof of income and a signed declaration based on the old SLC form. As was expected I received a reply refusing my application as the form "wasn't signed" A complaint was then raised which was rejected and is now escalated to the ombudsman. I have today come home to a letter from Erudio, confirming my loans have been defered. No reference to a signed form, no reference to the FSO. I've not got a DD in force and they are still claiming that "...not having a DD in force...will constitute a breach of your agreement", but obviously not enough of a breach to allow them to refuse a deferment... For those of you who are still debating whether to cave and sign a form, even a heavily redacted version stand firm. Don't give in to their bullying tactics, only give the information they are required to receive by law. These loans are post-98 loans.