Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Erudio - 'Arrears' Help


zohar
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3380 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I sent back the deferment form back in April, several weeks in advance of my deferment expiring,

 

however I didn't sign or date it as I was concerned about the legal implications of doing so,

I just filled out the bare minimum of information and sent it off along with a Jobcentre letter confirming I was in receipt of JSA

and a template letter from a website [removed] explaining why I wasn't signing the form.

 

Not too surprisingly I subsequently received a letter from Erudio rejecting my deferral and resending the form to be signed and dates.

 

At this point, I wrote to them asking them to fully explain what - if any - legal differences there were

and any possible implications in terms of signing their deferral form compared to the one used by SLC.

I also sent them a postal order for £1 and a request for my original signed credit agreements.

 

I received an acknowledgement letter off them and told that someone would respond in due course.

 

a few weeks later,

6 weeks after my deferral had officially ended

 

I received a leter from Erudio saying they had not yet received my monthly payment of £112.38

and that now 'account is now in arrears'.

 

It went on to say request that I make arrangements to clear the 'total overdue amount of £407.73 ass soon as possible'.

 

Last week finally got round to sending me my original signed credit agreements

but they did not include any response to my questions about the issues I raised concerning signing their deferral form.

 

I was considering signing the deferral form today, and called ahead to to query the arrears

as I had been told over the phone that my account had been 'frozen' for three months

(3 months from the original deferment date ending) and

 

the woman I spoke to said that amount was £300 (she couldn't say why her amount was lower than the one stated in the letter).

 

I explained that I thought that because the account was in dispute they weren't legally allowed to build up arrears and charges,

but she wasn't that knowledgeable and said that someone will call me back today before 5:30.

 

Can someone here give me any info on this?

 

It seems pretty unfair that that if you have legitimate questions about the way in which a new company is handling your deferment

and they take weeks and weeks to get back to you and endlessly dodge the issues,

they can they not only build up arrears on your account, but add charges too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Do not worry you are not alone!

 

Check out the long threads on MSE (money saving expert) and mumsnet about these very issues.

 

Short answer is that Erudio are a DCA (debt collection agency)

and to get any response from them you are going to have to be very firm in your dealings with them.

 

You are under the threshold to defer so write a 'complaint' to erudio,

there is an address on their website for complaints,

asking why you have not been deferred as they have the evidence to do so which you supplied well before your deferment date was up.

 

DO NOT SIGN/USE their deferral form as it seeks to change the terms of your original agreement with the SLC.

 

NEVER EVER PHONE THEM! Waste of your money and time and they will tell you nothing useful or helpful.

 

Send all mail recorded delivery or they may deny receiving it.

 

You owe them nothing and don't be bullied by them into believing you do.

 

If they do not defer you lodge a complaint with the FOS (financial ombudsman Service)

IN fact even when they do defer you lodge one anyway about their shoddy/unprofessional treatment of you

and hopefully they will not do the same thing in the future to you and others.

 

I could go on but check out the above threads for more support/guidance.

 

Mods, feel free to correct/add to any of the above.

 

Kinda new at this but have spent way to much time researching/dealing with Erudio

to let others suffer at their hands.

 

Hope I covered the main points as tactfully as I could!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your response.

 

I wrote to Erudio on June 9 asking them to detail the differences that I would be agreeing to in the credit agreement by signing the form.

 

They wrote back acknowledging my letter but they have yet to answer any of the questions.

 

Do you know how their credit agreement differs to the original one?

 

I have read through Mumsnet and MSE threads on this but I find them confusing and I can't find the info that specifically relates to my concerns.

 

Y'know, as much as I don't want to,

I'm on the verge of just signing the form as I'm weary of all the stress this is causing.

 

I know that's what they want and I really don't want to do it but by the 19th August

I will be 4 months in arrears and at that point they are able to ask for repayment (of the arrears),

if only at a highly reduced rate, based on my current circumstances.

 

Even if it was just a few pounds a week or month, that's not money I have at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it differs in respect of if you sign it Erudio will be able to register your loans with credit reference agencies as 'on payment holiday.'

In effect ruining (potentially) your credit rating.

 

They are saying you owe x amount of money as a debt to cannot afford to repay.

This is incorrect as it is student loan you are legally allowed to defer under the original SLC terms

and should not adversely affect your ability to get credit:

and there is some debate whether it is even legal for Erudio to do this if you are a genuine deferrer.

 

There may be a miss selling argument to pursue as taking out a student loan was supposed to be safe

and not discourage people from going to UNi for fear they would be burdened with a loan they would not be able to repay.

 

Hence you were allowed to defer yearly and after 25 years the loan would be written off.

 

However its speculation at this point because I do not know if Erudio have put anyone on 'payment holiday' as they only just took over this shambles.

 

But many people believe and are fearful that Erudio could ruin your credit rating: ie no mortgage or moblie phone contracts etc.

 

I am in same boat as you BTW.

 

I sent 3 months wage slips and covering letter well before my deferment date was up.

 

Erudio ignored it all,

I complained about their tardiness in not deferring me as I had sent the legal amount of evidence to do so.

 

The eight weeks for them to respond to my complaint is up and I am writing to the FOS for help.

 

I also got an Erudio arrears letter which I also complained about to them as I saw it as HARASSMENT.

 

My third complaint letter is also going this weekend about their continued failure to defer me and non response to my first two complaints.

 

I sent recorded letters and emailed Erudio the same info hoping for a faster response by email but they have not replied by email either.

 

This does not put them in a very good light with regulators. I have tried to solve my issues with them, they have ignored me.

 

I ain't letting it lie till all avenues of complaint have been exhaused.

 

Its all up in the air at the moment. Keep your spirits up. Read up about DCA tactics!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I seriously suggest you read the threads already here on CAG.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read the threads here but still haven't found the info I needed about what exactly are the differences in respect of signing the deferrment form.

 

From what I can see, I don't think anyone has got a full answer on that from Erudio, be that here Mumsnet and MSE.

 

If Erudio say there are no differences then that will either be fine, or it turns out that isn't the case,

then in court, they can be shown to be liars. Or they may well state what the differences are,

and I could then make a decision as to whether it's worth fighting.

 

Well, that was the theory anyway,

 

but like I say, I'm now getting too drained to continue what seems to be a futile battle

and may well just sign the damn form.

 

I just wish that I - or someone else- had been able to extract a final answer from Erudio earlier on in the year

so we could have made our decisions accordingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And just to add, in everything I've read across the various forums, I haven't seen a single person be accepted for deferral without signing the form.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sign and send back a copy of the old SLC deferment form

 

its in a thread here already.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think someone has on mse. You are falling into erudios trap! Ask your self! Am I under the threshold. Did I send enough evidence? Yes and yes. So you have done nothing wrong! Fight them all the way!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think someone has on mse. You are falling into erudios trap! Ask your self! Am I under the threshold. Did I send enough evidence? Yes and yes. So you have done nothing wrong! Fight them all the way!

 

You 'think' someone has...?

Hmmm..

..considering all the people who have been battling Erudio on the grounds of their controversial forms,

one would have hoped there would be more than one person that might have been granted a deferment

using an alternative method.

 

 

If it comes down to it and I don't send it back soon and then the ombudsman finds against me,

that leaves me with arrears that I will legally be obliged to pay regardless of being under the threshold.

I may be able to get a grace period whilst I'm not working but they will become enforceable when I get a job.

 

As I said above,

no one seems to have found out definitively what the legal implications are of signing their form are,

as opposed to the old SLC form, so no one can say for certain that it would be deleterious to do so.

 

 

Of course, I don't trust Erudio, and they've behaved abysmally in handling our complaints,

but acting on suspicion and speculation rather than solid facts,

is not a wise move when they could be found to have the law on their side.

Link to post
Share on other sites

law what law they are a dca.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have zero rights to do pretty much anything. Thats why they are desperately trying to get you to sign so they can change your terms and conditions to give them full control. If you sign and give in, you are in for a LOT more problems.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

They have zero rights to do pretty much anything. Thats why they are desperately trying to get you to sign so they can change your terms and conditions to give them full control. If you sign and give in, you are in for a LOT more problems.

 

In what specific ways does my signature allow them to change the terms and conditions of the original credit agreement?

 

 

Have you been able to get a deferment from them without signing their form?

Edited by zohar
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought you'd been reading around?

 

look at the text above where you have to sign on their inflated and intrusive referral form.

 

its all there.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the form in front of me right now. There's nothing above the signature line that suggests that one is agreeing to changes in the original credit agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yes, I've read that too.

 

Am I right in thinking that people here are suggesting that people send in their proof of income without signing the form, and then allow arrears to build up on their accounts when it's not accepted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen don't believe a word erudio tell you!

 

You are not in arrears.

 

They are trying it on.

 

If the FOS side with erudio then next step is court for breach of contract.

 

I can't really afford to go to court but as I am hoping to get a mortgage next year

I really have no choice as I will need my credit rating intact!

Link to post
Share on other sites

they cant mark your credit file.

 

don't think there is any 'proof' anywhere they have done this to anyone.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I've read that too.

 

Am I right in thinking that people here are suggesting that people send in their proof of income without signing the form, and then allow arrears to build up on their accounts when it's not accepted?

 

no you send back a filled in copy of the original SLC deferment form.

and sign it.

 

let them waffle on about arrears etc etc .

 

you start paying, when you shouldn't need to

and they've got you.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen don't believe a word erudio tell you!

 

You are not in arrears.

 

They are trying it on.

 

If the FOS side with erudio then next step is court for breach of contract.

 

I can't really afford to go to court but as I am hoping to get a mortgage next year

I really have no choice as I will need my credit rating intact!

 

Well, SLC always used to put accounts in arrears too, so this isn't any different.

 

I'm inclined to think that if Erudio are acting illegally , then whether we have signed the forms or not, is neither here nor there. If they are acting outside the law this will apply to everyone regardless of which forms they did - or didn't - sign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres a HUGE difference between acting illegally and acting unlawfully. Follow the advice given and you'll be fine. Erudio are simply a DCA. Nothing more. They know they have little chance at collecting most of the accounts, which is why they are trying to force people into signing a new contract which allows the DCA to do pretty much whatever they like.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres a HUGE difference between acting illegally and acting unlawfully. Follow the advice given and you'll be fine. Erudio are simply a DCA. Nothing more. They know they have little chance at collecting most of the accounts, which is why they are trying to force people into signing a new contract which allows the DCA to do pretty much whatever they like.

 

OK, I hear what you are saying but I'd be grateful if you could paste here the part of the form which you're referring to. At the moment I can only see declarations pertaining to 'mistatements', 'omissions', confirmation of income and granting Erudio the right to request further information/verification 'from whom the income is derived'. Unless I'm missing something, none of this suggests that a signature will thus allow Erudio to do 'pretty much whatever they like'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...