I have a few student loans taking back from 1997, 98, 99 and 00.

I went Bankrupt in 2010 but was told my student loans would not be included in my Bankrupcy.

I spoke to SLC and they backed this up.

I was still receiving deferment forms from SLC and I kept deferring the payments

but have now received a letter from Erudio who say they have now bought the debt.

I have now read that certain student loans could be put under Bankrupcy so could be written off.

Would these loans have been written off when I was declared bankrupt?

Was I miss-informed?

Any information would be great

https://www.nationaldebtline.org/EW/factsheets/Pages/01%20EW%20Bankruptcy/Page-09.aspx#quicklink1

According to the National Debtline fact sheet, your Student loan might not have been included within the BR.

However, I believe that some Student loans might not be collectible because of age.. I will try and find someone who might know.

apparently, loans up to 9/04 could be included.

s42 Higher Education Act 04 etc stopped loans after that being subject to bankruptcy.

is it retrospective?

apparently not, s42 (5)?

but, did you notify/include them re bank'y?

an old article but shows that slc had to repay where loans were still being repaid despite informed banked

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/4188038/Student-loans-bankruptcy-loophole-costs-taxpayer-2.4m.html

Were your loans all under the old-style type? if so have you ever deferred them?

Thanks for the replies.

The loans were old style loans.

I have been deferring my loans ever since leaving Uni in 2000 then went bankrupt in 2010.

I then went back to Uni in 2011 and was told I could not get a student loan due to being bankrupt.

So kept deferring my loan repayments as I was under the threshold.

Any debts I had which were sold to DCA's were all written off with the bankruptcy.

Now my student loans have been sold to a DCA!

As 'Ford' mentioned loans up to 2004 could be included in bankruptcy

but I was told it couldn't by SLC.

Does anyone know what's correct?

quite honestly i'dbe sending arrows a copy of your BK and stating they were within it

let them argue /findout otherwise?

were they inc in the BK, you should have a list?

I'll find out for sure tomorrow for you.

Please PM me to remind after 10am

I personally would not trust what the SLC say either as it would appear with them,

that dependant upon whom you speak with within SLC they do give out conflicting information.

There are recent examples where they permitted one to defer on benefits while another lady in an almost identical situation

- working part time and in receipt of tax credits, child benefit, housing benefit etc had this all added to her income

which led to her achieving income above the threshold.

The result is that she was told she should be repaying, while a lady in the same situation was told she didn't !/?!?!?

So, do not trust what the SLC tell you & research yourself.

PS: What is this loophole that permits old style loans to be included in a bankruptcy?

I am glad i read this thread as i was until reading this, of the impression that they could not ...even the old loans.

Mortgage style loans (old style student loans) have always been non-provable in bankruptcy,

however, for a period of time the new type of loan wasn't.

As a result many students and graduates in England and Wales used bankruptcy to wipe their student loans

until the Higher Education Act 2004 was used to close the loophole.

Now all student loans are repayable even after bankruptcy.

Regards

Andy

there you go, our answer...brilliant work.

dx

Indeed dx, many thanks Andy for the clear and concise explanation.

Further to the above post It appears that both old style and new style student loans could be included within a bankruptcy up until the 1st July 2004.

Where bankruptcy occurred between 1st July 2004 and 31st August 2004 only new style loans could be included.

The first type, often called ‘mortgage-style’ loans, was given to those who started a course between September 1990 and August 1998. These are paid by direct debit. The new, ‘income-contingent’ type applies to those who were considered new students from September 1998. These are paid through the PAYE tax system.

As of 2004 both of these student loan types are protected from bankruptcy. In essence this means that you will have to pay your loan back regardless of its type.

Where bankruptcy concluded on or after 1st September 2004 no student loans could be included.

So has stated now all student loans are repayable even after bankruptcy.

Regards

Andy

Thank for everyone involved in answer my question.

My current deferment runs out in four weeks and have recently got a new job which pays more than threshold.

What's my legal stance on this?

Am in a different situation from other people on here who don't earn enough to pay back.

Does anyone have any advice if I should write them a letter

and ask for discount as they did buy the debt for a pittance!

Hello there,

You'll need to either defer or make an arrangement to pay. Are you still able to defer?

Wont be able to defer any more unfortunately.

Does anyone know is it a set amount you pay back or

can Erudio make up there own rules and

say I have to pay something stupid a month back?

I don't want to deal with them through the phone so will be writing to them.

You can complete a financial statement and make an offer based upon what is realistic.

There's a good budget here: https://www.nationaldebtline.org/EW/steps/step2/Pages/Step_2_11.aspx

In addition, you could see if they have a copy of the original paperwork, do you know what a CCA request is?

Got a rough idea what an CCA request is.

Do you think sending the request first is a good place to start before I send in anything else?

I got a letter mentioning there were giving me a discount to not being compliant.

Unsure exactly what this means.

I think it could be worth doing, as the loans are very old. It may be that they don't have their paperwork in order. If certainly seen it a fair few times with old-style loans.

It appears that they may already know that there are potential issues with that discount offer.

I think you *could* be on to something.

If they don't have the paperwork were does that leave me and paying back the loan?

aha the old discount

we did guess these might start appearing

we'd already had a tip off that many agreements are nowhere to be found from

I think it was thesis [link DCA] years ago.

ho ho let the fun begin

get that CCA request off

use a blank £1 PO too.

dx

If they don't have the paperwork were does that leave me and paying back the loan?

as with all the others that have bought these old SLC 'loans'

up a creek without a paddle till the find the signed agreement!!

I also seem to remember thay have to produce copies of your deferement forms for each year too?

if they cant then this opens up the statute barring question I seem to remember also.

have a look at LINK or THESIS threads in this forum.

dx

Erudio have given me a reduction in balance due to being non-complaint.

Sounds like you got the same thing - I've CCA'd them and got nothing back so they are currently in default, long may it continue.

If I get to the bottom of the non-compliance it'll be posted on here in my thread

"SLC non-complaint CCAt - been given a partial reduction in debt...now invalid?".

Think I'm on the right track, and I suspect you have had a charge imposed on your account at some point too...

DX - copies of deferements?

Do you have any more details on that?

My SLC SAR was incomplete in that respect, if they need those documents and even SLC dont have them then that could be a nail in the coffin.

Send off a CCA request and keep an eye for an explaination of their non-compliance.

Seems like it must be a big problem for them, as I can't see a company giving out reductions without the loans even being questioned in the first place.

Next step for me is to get the CCA request sent and wait for reply!! Whenever that will be!

rosskies thread for reference http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?418933-SLC-non-complaint-CCAt-been-given-a-partial-reduction-in-debt...now-invalid

thanks andy for post #13