Student Loans Company

[Andy S]

I have two loans, one from 1992 and one from 1995. I was issued with a default notice on both accounts in September 1999 which I ignored. (depressed, already had £20,000 of consumer debt etc.)

My only crime was that I had failed to fill out the deferrment notices from 1999 although my income has always been below the threshold required before I had to make repayments anyway.

Last week I get a letter from McKenzie Hall, Solicitors for SLC saying they want both loans paid back and are threatening court action.

My loans were isssued prior to 1998 and are subject to the Consumer Credit Act.

Surely as the default was issued in 1999 and as it is past the six year period under the Statute of Limitations all I do now is wait until I receive the Court summons and say that their claim is now time barred under the Statute of Limitations Act.

Surely the same law applies to them as to other loan companies or does someone have any light they can shed on the issue?

[Duffers Mum]

I believe Mackenzie Hall <spit> are a DCA and not solicitors, but of course I may be wrong, my husband has had some of their nasty letters sent to him which we are ignoring, there is lots of useful info on this site and some very helpful and informative people - I'm sure somebody will be able to give you some good advice.

[Andy S]

I'm kind of answering my own question here but I found this useful information about Student Loans whilst trawling the web:

Student loan agreements are simple contracts and this gives the Student Loans Company (SLC) 6 years from the date you last paid or acknowledged the debt to go to court to enforce the agreement. There are two sorts of student loans and different rules apply depending upon when you took out the loan.

Old style or “mortgage” student loans are consumer credit agreements. Payments cannot be automatically deducted from your wages. The SLC has to go to court before they can enforce the debt against you. This means that the Limitations Act can apply if you have not paid or acknowledged the debt for over 6 years. (Asking for the loan to be deferred could count as acknowledging the debt and start time running again).

From September 1998 new style or “income contingent” student loans include rules to say that repayments are automatically deducted directly from your wages or through your tax return if you are self employed. This means that the SLC are still allowed to take money from your wages for a loan over 6 years old as they do not have to go to court to do so.

So basically if six years have passed since you last paid or acknowledged the debt then you don't owe it as it is time barred under the Statute of Limitations Act.

I can now tell McKenzie Hall to go take a **** to itself.

[ian cognito]

<H2>Student loans

Student loan agreements are simple contracts and this gives the Student Loans Company (SLC) 6 years from the date you last paid or acknowledged the debt to go to court to enforce the agreement. There are two sorts of student loans and different rules apply depending upon when you took out the loan.
Old style or “mortgage” student loans are consumer credit agreements. Payments cannot be automatically deducted from your wages. The SLC has to go to court before they can enforce the debt against you. This means that the Limitations Act can apply if you have not paid or acknowledged the debt for over 6 years. (Asking for the loan to be deferred could count as acknowledging the debt and start time running again).
From September 1998 new style or “income contingent” student loans include rules to say that repayments are automatically deducted directly from your wages or through your tax return if you are self employed. This means that the SLC are still allowed to take money from your wages for a loan over 6 years old as they do not have to go to court to do so.

</H2>Debt Factsheets - Liability for Debts and the Limitation Act

[Andy S]

Here's a letter you can send them if you feel that the above applies to you:

Your Name:
Your Address:
Date:

To: (SLC or their DCA or lawyers)

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Dear Sir/Madam

Account No:

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

I/we would point out that under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 "an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued".

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period".

The last correspondence/payment/acknowledgement or payment of this debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me/us in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I/we suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me/us to recover the alleged amount claimed.

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that "continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statue barred could amount to harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970".

I/we await your written confirmation that no further contact will be made concerning the above account and confirmation that this matter is now closed.

I/we look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully

(Your signature)

REMEMBER
KEEP A COPY OF ALL LETTERS YOU SEND TO YOUR CREDITORS

Good luck and may the force be with you!

[noomill060]

Took SLC to Court, they caved in and made an offer of settlement today.

noomill v Student Loan Company

[birdkeith]

hi andy,

i read what you say with great interest you see i am in a similar
position as yourselfi i signed my student loan agreement in 1995,and had my last defferment from april 99 to 2001,afer that i moved house but notified them as to this, i heard nothing further from the slc untill 2005/6 when i found out that they had won a ccj against me in 2002,i wont go into the details of the methods used to obtain that ccj just suffice it to say i am not at all pleased,however i went to court and had the judgement set aside,the thing is when i signed the contract the ceiling on the debt was 25 years or reching the age of fifty,now i think that contract should be adhered to,but they are now taking me back to court and saying i have passed the ceiling,this is the
new regulations,can they do it,plus the only contact i have had with them is through a third party,they have only just contacted me,i mean in the last two months, in your opinion how do i stand?

birdkeith

[birdkeith]

hi birdkeith again, i have to say this is a brilliant site,loads of usefull info,but
in my first thread i didnt go into things too deeply,i am talking about a loan
taken out in 1995 so comes under the control of the cca,however in 99 i was
granted defferment to 2000,however i moved house in sept of that year and
wrote to the slc informing them of this,in response they started a search for me,even though i had told them my new address,in 2000 i moved again this
time to a different town,i also told them of this,but big mistake i told them on
the phone,i didnt hear from them again untill 2003 whenthey sent me forms
asking for details of my earnings,and that of my husbands,yes by now i was
married,i had written to them informing them of my new status,they had taken
me to court and obtained a ccj,i didnt find out about this untill 2005,i did get
this set aside,but they have re instituted this in court and although i have
filed a defence,they have asked for this to be struck out,they want another
ccj unapposed,nice people or what?has anyone got any suggestions
yous birdkeith