Mr. H -v- SLC (now possibly Smith Lawson as well)

[Mr. H]

Forgive me if this is a bit long and convoluted. I'll try to be as brief as possible

April 2006: I contacted SLC to advise you of my change of address.

April/May 2006: I contacted SLC again as I had not received my deferment pack. At this time I was advised that despite my previous contact, my address details had not been updated. Following this conversation I did however receive a deferment pack.

May 2006: I returned the completed deferment application and attached the necessary wage slips to verify my earnings.

June/July 2006: SLC return my wage slips to me.

November 2006: Westcott Credit Services advise me of an outstanding debt of £307.18.

January 2007: I wrote to Westcot adviseing the course of events (above). This was in fact after numerous telephone conversations in which they either gave me bad advise or referred me to the wrong people.

March 2007: SLC start wring to me again chasing arrears for since May 2006.

All letters are replied to, and yesterday:

28th April 2007: Letter received (2nd class) from Smith Lawson dated 23rd April, demanding payment of arrears of £401.62 (including various charges). Also stating that I should respond to the letter within seven days else they with request that their client terminate the agreement and proceeds with action for recovery of the full balance.

I’m really not sure what to do. I don’t want to telephone them tomorrow, only to have them mess me about. I’d rather write to them, reminding them of the course of events, and enclosing a copy of my last letter which I sent less than 2 weeks ago. However I am worried that in doing that I will have exceeded the seven days that they have given me to respond.

This is the draft which I propose to issue:

Originally Posted by ”Mr. H”

My Ref: 91*********

Thank you for your letter of 23rd April 2007. You may not be aware that I have written to your colleagues at the Student Loans Company, as well as your previous agent Westcot Credit Services, on a number of occasions over recent months.

I feel that I have addressed all matters in respect of your letter in my most recent letter to Angela Herbert of the Student Loans Company Correspondence Division. A copy of this letter is attached for your reference.

I remind you that I submitted a deferment application in May 2006. That wage slips were attached to that application. That despite Student Loans Company being able to return my wage slips, they appear to have contrived to lose the deferment application.

This is clearly a matter that has not been dealt with correctly by Student Loans Company last year. You may wish to refer this matter back to them in order that deferment can be applied correctly for the years 2006-07. I have copies of all letters I have written to Student Loans Company since 2006. Should you require sight of them, I will be happy to send you copies.

For you information, I received your letter dated 23rd April 2007 on Saturday 28th April. For correspondence requiring such prompt attention you may wish to ensure that in future letters requiring such prompt attention are despatched on the same day that they are dated, additionally they are posted under first class cover.


Yours sincerely




Mr. H

Right now I'm more concerned about the arrears which they seem incapable of sorting. There are £40 worth of charges, and I propose to be going after those once the arrears/deferrment is sorted.

Any advise regarding course of action/wording of letters/what to expect would be much appreciated

[Mr. H]

Oh yeah -

All my loans ere taken out between 1991 and 1993

[CAGisforME]

The way I understand it, despite your letter telling them you had moved, SLC did not change your address and therefore your deferment papers were late reaching you.

(Check this forum out - LOTS of people have been having this problem)

Then they accepted your deferment and so it's the charges/arrears for the period you weren't deferred for that they are chasing you for.

There are two ways to look at this and checking out the "Debt Collectors forum" for ways of dealing with these bottom feeders is a good start.

1. I think you need to send a CCA request to the DCA that are dealing with this. This will cost you £1, and they should then produce your signed agreements and all other paperwork on ALL of their systems, including an up to date statement. They have 12 days to respond. Once that time limit is up the debt is unenforceable, once a further 30 days go by they have committed a criminal act.

This reason I advise this is that they will probably not have the relevant documentation and therefore will pass you back to the SLC.

The information is excellent as it may show that your agreements are unenforceable and will also give you some breathing space as you can state that the debt is in dispute until they produce it.


2. Send an FULL Subject Access Request to SLC. (This will cost you £10) tell them that you want ALL information on ALL their systems. They will have 40 days to respond and again, you can state you are in dispute until the information is produced.

Again this will give you valuable information.

I'm a firm believer that these two acts will 1. Ensure that you have all the relevant information to hand. 2. Grab you some breathing space. 3. Potentially get the DCA off your back (they don't like folks who know the law and use it against them) and 4. Should clear up what you owe and to whom.

I hope that helps.

[Zimmie]

I totally agree with CAGisforME. At the time you took out your student loans they were regulated by The CCA 1974. Will be very interesting to see if they come up with the agreements. If they don't and come back with the 'we don't keep records that old' .... well that's their problem. If they are still outstanding, they should keep them!

[Mr. H]

Originally Posted by CAGisforME

The way I understand it, despite your letter telling them you had moved, SLC did not change your address and therefore your deferment papers were late reaching you.

Not quite

The deferrment forms did reach me (eventually), and I submitted them on time (give or take a couple of weeks).

The problem is that despite their being able to return my payslips (with a covering letter), they claim never to have received the actual defferment application (that the pay slips were stapled to).

I agree with the stuff about the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) & CCA, and will get those sorted ASAP.

Cheers for the prompt reply!!!

[CAGisforME]

The fact that you have the covering letter with your payslips etc proves that they got your deferment, in my opinion, as you would have no other reason to send them to SLC in the first place.

If they were on time - you don't owe them any arrears etc
If they were two weeks late (for instance) - you would owe them the payments that should have been made for this period ONLY, provided you had deferred for the rest of the loan period.

Hit them with an Subject Access Request and wait to see what you get back.

In the meantime check out the Debt Collection forum for ways to deal with the bottom feeders. (I suggest a letter stating you will only deal with them in writing to kick off with and go from there - after which time if they call you again either hang up or tell them you will only discuss in writing, oh, and that you are recording the call - that's always a good way to get THEM to terminate the call )

Keep us informed as you go along and someone will be about to help you with any next stage.

[CAGisforME]

Just as a little "aside".

Don't bother trying to discuss anything with the SLC over the phone either. I can promise you I know how they work.

Because your statement will reflect that you owe them money they will NOT discuss much with you until they have hauled you over the coals for the payments they deem to be outstanding and - more often than not - will refuse to put you through to someone more reasonable (ie a Manager/Supervisor).

When I had this problem I refused POINT BLANK to discuss my loans over the phone and told them, when they rang me, that if they continued to do so i would report them to the Police and other relevant authorities for harrassment.

Despite a few "standard garbage" responses, eventually they got the message and I started to get "human being" response letters to my queries.

(I recently spoke with the SLC to get through to the person dealing with my "write off" claim - due to retirement - and was told by the muppet in the call centre that they don't write off the loans for ANY reason - YES they do - that they can't defer the loan for more than a year - YES they can (mine's deferred for 3 years) and that I HAD to talk to her about the arrears - Which had just been written off by a supervisor. She gave up eventually and put me through to the person I needed. I now have a direct number for that person, so that I don't have to go through that particularly ridiculous experience again! )

Keep Going - take control!!!

[Mr. H]

Originally Posted by CAGisforME

Don't bother trying to discuss anything with the SLC over the phone either. I can promise you I know how they work.

I've given up dealing with SLC over the phone - I've made sure they don't have my number for precicely the reasons you've stated.

In all the years since I graduated, SLC has cocked up more of my deferremnt applications than they've got right. In fact every year up to 2002 I had to have one argument or another with them about what they had (or hadn't) done.

I'm a bit worried this time as they are threatening me wth termination of the whole agreement.

I would have thought that receiving my payslips back with a covering letter (albeit an undated, with my name & address written on by hand, and a typed thank-you for submitting info), would have been enough of an indication that the form had been received.

[CAGisforME]

To Be Honest (But don't take my word for it!) I doubt they will terminate the whoel agreement.

They have threatened me with this several times including 3 years when they couldn't find me because of a messy divorce and an ex who deliberately wouldn't tell them my new address. (Oh, and they ignore my change of address letter too!)

There are so any people on this site with problems with deferment that I can only advise that in future, if you are unlucky enough to have to deal with these "people", then send everything Recorded Delivery and chase them up constantly until you have your deferment notice in your hot little hand. (They would do the same - so play them at their own game)

CCA the Debt Collection lot that are chasing you. I'll take a small wager that they'll pass it straight back to SLC.

Meanwhile Subject Access Request the SLC and see what they come up with. Make sure it's a full Subject Access Request and that should give you transcripts of all your calls, letters received and sent etc etc. Building your case nicely!!

Keep EVERYTHING they send. Report back once you have it and I'm sure there will be help available. Don't worry about their silly little threats!

Once you have CCAd the Debt Collector and SARd the SLC the debt is officially in Dispute. They aren't allowed to terminate the agreement in these circumstances and IF they do, it just adds to your case.

[emmaf01]

I also recommend starting each letter in capital letters, THIS ACCOUNT IS NOW IN DISPUTE. And always sending by recorded delivery. I have learned from the past they are useless.

[Mr. H]

Originally Posted by CAGisforME

CCA the Debt Collection lot that are chasing you.

I've just come back from holiday, and I havn't donme this (mainly due to not being able to find a letter template)

Could someone please post a link (CCA 1974 version)

<edit>Forget the above, just found the necessary letter here

[emmaf01]

Good luck, Mr H- we are all in the same boat.

Don't forget to also do the Subject Access Request- so you can claim back the unlawful charges applied to your account as well.

[Mr. H]

I had a reply to my CCA 1974 request today.
Of course they’ve sent me the wrong paperwork!!!

On all their letters to me (including the covering letter received today) they’ve quoted a reference with the prefix 91, I presume on the basis that this loan was first taken out diring academic year 1991-92. However the copy of the agreement they’ve actually sent me agreement is dated March 1993 and the reference has the prefix 92.

Should I write back to Smith Lawson saying ‘you’ve sent me the wrong paperwork’ or is there another letter I should send off in their direction?

Oh besides that, at the bottom of the covering letter they say that all enquiries should now be made to NCO Financial Services in Preston. Who are they???

[emmaf01]

NCO are a debt collection agency. Which means they've passed on your debt to them.

As for the wrongly dated agreement, time for a letter stating that the agreement is wrong (state why) and telling them that you will not deal with anyone other than them. Tell them that the account is in dispute.

[Mr. H]

Over the last few weeks my case has been passed from one organisation to another like an unwanted birthday present.

It's got so complictated I've paraphrased everything, and posted the story (with copies of letters) on my own web-site here I'm thinking about e-mailing links to all the companies that have have written to me about this.

[Thepower]

Wicked web site mate, well done
Would it possible to have a list of letter templates :
SARs
CAA
When they don’t reply to a CAA
Ect…..
I think that would help a lot of victims of the SLC




The CAA worked for me it put the debt in dispute, when I phoned the SLC to find out about illegal charges they said it would be UNLAWFUL for them to discusses my case as it could be viewed as them chasing the debt (music to one's ears)…

I think your problem is the “debt” has been passed to out side agents, by the look of the letters there just automated mail. DCA just don't give a S***T

What I would do is write to the SLC saying are you aware your collection agents are trying to collect an unlawfully, (because of the CAA) and you receive any more correspondence you report the SLC to the OFT

SLC hate the OFT as any complaints must be included in there annual report to the department of industry. Believe me statuary breaches don’t look good

[Mr. H]

I got my templates here:

Student Loan Company - general

To be honest with you , with regards the other stuff, it's been causing me an awful lot of stress, and the way I feel right now is that I have a sufficient defence to defend legal action against me.

On that basis I'm happy to receive their summons and sort it out that way